MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transportation Analytics with Fuzzy Logic and Regression

2022· article· en· W4295767229 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nguyen Duy Thong Jason Tran, Carson K. Leung, Tanisha Turner, She‐Ching Wu, Nurida Karimbaeva, Juhee Kim, Alfredo Cuzzocrea

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchedulePublic transportFuzzy logicComputer scienceTransport engineeringTransit (satellite)AnalyticsReal-time computingRegression analysisOperations researchEngineeringData miningArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bus riders desire precision and accuracy when using the transit system. While the transit system is responsible for maintaining and delivering public transportation services for the city residents, they rely on idealized assumptions regarding real-world bus driving conditions. The published bus schedule seems to assume that the buses move at a uniform speed at all times, which leads to bus arrival times that are imprecise and inaccurate. Busses can arrive early, late, or on time. Given that bus stops cannot have a dynamic schedule, it is logical to create a schedule accounting for the changes in traffic patterns. Hence, in this paper, we present a transportation analytics solution. It captures imprecision via fuzzy logic. It takes in account lane closures (for construction sites) and traffic count when predicting bus on-time performance via regression. Evaluation on real-life data covering close to 6,000 bus stops in the Canadian city of Winnipeg demonstrates the practicality of our fuzzy logic- and regression-based transportation analytics solution in predicting whether buses arrive the bus stops early, on time, or late in various time periods of the day. This helps in building a smart city.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE)Same topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207