Analysis on Lane Capacity for Expressway Toll Station Using Toll Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Toll stations are bottlenecks in the traffic flow of expressways, and the evaluation of their capacity is essential for the operation of the expressway. Traditional capacity studies are mostly based on theoretical modelling of traffic engineering or simulation, with a focus on parameter tuning and idealized hypotheses, resulting in poor reliability. In view of the coexistence of electronic toll collection lanes and compound toll collection lanes at toll stations of expressways in China, the present study analyses the capacity of entrance and exit lanes of toll stations under mixed traffic conditions using a real toll data-driven approach. Firstly, the service time of a single vehicle during the saturation period was taken as the starting point for the capacity estimates. Secondly, the variation in service time for multiple categories of vehicles is modelled using lognormal distribution. Finally, the capacity of the two types of toll lanes at the designated toll station is determined. The important outcome of this study is the calculation of authentic capacity at the toll stations and the discussion of individual special toll lanes. Accordingly, it contributes to the development of appropriate policies to manage the operation of the toll plaza effectively.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".