MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361304643 · doi:10.1109/tits.2023.3256239

Guest Editorial Introduction to the Special Issue on AI-Empowered Trajectory Analytics in Intelligent Transportation Systems

2023· editorial· en· W4361304643 on OpenAlexaff
Jerry Chun‐Wei Lin, Gautam Srivastava, Jhing-Fa Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · 2023
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrajectoryComputer scienceData scienceIntelligent transportation systemBig dataInternet of ThingsData analysisAnalyticsThe InternetOperations researchComputer securityTransport engineeringData miningWorld Wide WebEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the rapid growth of location sensing in the Internet of Things (IoT) and Internet of Vehicles (IoV) techniques, trajectory data has been generated that can be used to describe diversity and characteristics of moving objects. The analysis and management of trajectory patterns has become an important issue in recent decades, as it supports efficient strategies and decisions based on discovered patterns and knowledge from the mobility behavior of customers or citizens in many fields and applications (e.g., smart city, intelligent transportation, location-based services, health management, etc.). Since the recent development in AI, it is possible to use AI-based techniques to analyze trajectory data at an unprecedented scale to address applicable issues of effectiveness, efficiency, accuracy, and privacy in Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), therefore, it is a highly competitive area to propose innovative methods, principles, procedures, techniques, frameworks, theories, and applications to address the aforementioned challenges of trajectory data in ITS. This Special Issue is intended to provide a forum for all researchers from academia and industry to share their original, creative, innovative, cutting-edge insights, theories, ideas, and developments for the analysis of trajectory data using AI-empowered techniques in ITS. In this special issue, we received 52 submissions, and finally accepted 17 articles to be published in the special issue. Below is a brief introduction to each of them.

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), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.456
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.253
Teacher spread0.241 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation SystemsSame topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207