MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313361105 · doi:10.3390/math11010184

A Microscopic Heterogeneous Traffic Flow Model Considering Distance Headway

2022· article· en· W4313361105 on OpenAlexaff
Faryal Ali, Zawar Hussain Khan, Khurram Shehzad Khattak, T. Aaron Gulliver, Akhtar Nawaz Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeadwayPlatoonTraffic flow (computer networking)AccelerationTraffic waveMicroscopic traffic flow modelSimulationComputer scienceFlow (mathematics)Constant (computer programming)Traffic modelTraffic generation modelThree-phase traffic theoryRoad trafficTraffic congestion reconstruction with Kerner's three-phase theoryControl theory (sociology)EngineeringTransport engineeringReal-time computingPhysicsMechanicsTraffic congestionArtificial intelligenceComputer networkControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The intelligent driver (ID) model characterizes traffic behavior with a constant acceleration exponent and does not follow traffic physics. This results in unrealistic traffic behavior. In this paper, a new microscopic heterogeneous traffic flow model is proposed which improves the performance of the ID model. The forward and lateral distance headways are used to characterize traffic behavior. The stability of the ID and proposed models is examined over a 1000 m circular road with a traffic disturbance after 30 s. The results obtained show that the proposed model is more stable than the ID model. The performance of the proposed and ID models is evaluated over an 1800 m circular road for 150 s with a platoon of 51 vehicles. Results are presented which indicate that traffic evolves realistically with the proposed model. This is because it is based on the lateral distance headway.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.185 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematicsSame topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207