MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310818308 · doi:10.28991/cej-2022-08-11-02

Modeling Sustainable Traffic Behavior: Avoiding Congestion at a Stationary Bottleneck

2022· article· en· W4310818308 on OpenAlexaff
Imran Badshah, Zawar H. Khan, T. Aaron Gulliver, Khurram Shehzad Khattak, Syed Saad

Bibliographic record

VenueCivil Engineering Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBottleneckTraffic congestionTraffic flow (computer networking)Negative binomial distributionStatisticsPopulationMorningMathematicsSimulationComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEngineeringTransport engineeringPhysicsDemographyComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sustainable traffic behaviour is increasing in importance as traffic volume rises due to population growth. In this paper, a model for traffic flow at a stationary bottleneck is developed to determine the parameters that cause congestion. Towards this goal, traffic density, speed, and delay were acquired during peak and off-peak periods in the morning and afternoon at a stationary bottleneck in Peshawar, KPK, Pakistan. The morning and afternoon peak periods have high densities, low speeds, and considerable delays. Regression models are developed using this data. These results indicate that there is a linear relationship between density and time at the stationary bottleneck and a negative linear relationship between density and speed. Thus, an increase in density increases the time delay and reduces the speed. I comprehensive traffic delay model is characterized by a stationary bottleneck. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) test and P-values were used to identify the best-fit distribution for speed and density. The binomial and generalized extreme values are considered the best fits for density and speed. The results presented can be used to develop accurate simulation models for stationary bottlenecks to reduce congestion. Doi: 10.28991/CEJ-2022-08-11-02 Full Text: PDF

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCivil Engineering JournalSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207