MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367626136 · doi:10.3390/app13095545

A New Macroscopic Traffic Flow Characterization Incorporating Traffic Emissions

2023· article· en· W4367626136 on OpenAlexaff
Tanveer Qaiser, Ahmed B. Altamimi, Fayaz Ahmad Khan, Mohammad Alsaffar, Abdulrahman Alreshidi, Khurram Shehzad Khattak, Zawar H. Khan, Wilayat Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersUniversity of Hail
KeywordsTraffic congestion reconstruction with Kerner's three-phase theoryTraffic flow (computer networking)Traffic congestionTraffic bottleneckGreenhouse gasTraffic generation modelEnvironmental sciencePresumptionTraffic optimizationComputer scienceTransport engineeringFloating car dataEngineeringReal-time computingComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Densely populated cities have led to increased traffic congestion and, consequently, increased greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles. Thus, it is important to develop traffic models to overcome congestion and increased air pollution. In the literature, traffic model characterizations rely predominantly on traffic dynamics and ignore traffic emissions. In this study, a new macroscopic model targeting traffic emissions and drivers’ presumption based on traffic emissions is proposed to overcome traffic congestion and pollution. The traffic emissions characterization was based on the CO2 data employed in the second traffic system. For the performance analysis, the results of the proposed and Zhang’s traffic models were compared. The results were obtained using the ROE technique to predict traffic evolution. The scheme was implemented in MATLAB. Compared with Zhang’s traffic model, the suggested traffic model based on emissions reflected traffic behavior more realistically.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.376
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207