MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311626484 · doi:10.3390/futuretransp2040054

Winter Road Friction Estimations via Multi-Source Road Weather Data—A Case Study of Alberta, Canada

2022· article· en· W4311626484 on OpenAlexaffabout
Xueru Ding, Tae J. Kwon

Bibliographic record

VenueFuture Transportation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSmart Materials for Construction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTransport engineeringRoad surfaceWarning systemEnvironmental scienceCivil engineeringEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Road friction has long been recognized as one of the most effective winter road maintenance (WRM) performance measures. It allows WRM personnel to make more informed decisions to improve their services and helps road users make trip-related decisions. In this paper, a machine-learning-based methodological framework was developed to model road friction using inputs from mobile road weather information systems (RWIS) that collect spatially continuous road weather data and road grip. This study also attempts to estimate friction using data from stationary RWIS that are installed far from each other, thereby leaving large areas unmonitored. To fill in the spatial gaps, a kriging interpolator was developed to create a continuous friction map. Slippery road risk levels were classified to provide an overview of road conditions via a risk warning map. The proposed method was evaluated with a selected highway segment in Alberta, Canada. Results show that the models developed herein are highly accurate (93.3%) in estimating friction and identifying dangerous road segments via a color-coded risk map. Given its high performance, the developed model has the potential for large-scale implementation to facilitate more efficient WRM services while also improving the safety and mobility of the traveling public.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFuture TransportationSame topicSmart Materials for ConstructionFrench-language works237,207