Edge Intelligence in Intelligent Transportation Systems: A Survey
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Edge intelligence (EI) is becoming one of the research hotspots among researchers, which is believed to help empower intelligent transportation systems (ITS). ITS generates a large amount of data at the network edge by millions of devices and sensors. Data-driven artificial intelligence (AI) is at the core of ITS development. By pushing the AI frontier to the network edge, EI enables ITS AI applications to have lower latency, higher security, less pressure on the backbone network and better use edge big data. This paper surveys Edge Intelligence in Intelligent Transportation Systems. We first introduce the challenges ITS faces and explain the motivation of using EI in ITS. We then explore the framework of using EI in ITS, including the EI-based ITS architecture, the data gathering and communication methods, the data processing and service delivery, and the performance indexes. The enabling technologies, such as AI models, the Internet of Things, and Edge Computing technologies used in EI-based ITS, are reviewed intensively. We discuss the edge intelligence applications and research fields in ITS in depth. Typical application scenarios, such as autonomous driving, vehicular edge computing, intelligent vehicular transportation system, unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) in ITS environment, and rail transportation control and management, are explored. The general platforms of EI, the EI training and inference in ITS, as well as the benchmark datasets, are introduced. Finally, we discuss some of the challenges and future directions of using EI in ITS.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it