MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379054030 · doi:10.3390/s23115248

Spatiotemporal Clustering of Parking Lots at the City Level for Efficiently Sharing Occupancy Forecasting Models

2023· article· en· W4379054030 on OpenAlexafffund
Mir’atul Khusna Mufida, Thierry Delot, Martin Trépanier, Dorsaf Zekri

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Parking Systems Research
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentre interuniversitaire de recherche sur les reseaux d'entreprise, la logistique et le transportUniversité Polytechnique Hauts-de-FranceCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueKementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan TeknologiPolytechnique Montréal
KeywordsOccupancyCluster analysisTransferabilitySoftware deploymentComputer scienceProcess (computing)Parking lotData miningDimension (graph theory)Machine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to address the challenge of developing accurate and efficient parking occupancy forecasting models at the city level for autonomous vehicles. Although deep learning techniques have been successfully employed to develop such models for individual parking lots, it is a resource-intensive process that requires significant amounts of time and data for each parking lot. To overcome this challenge, we propose a novel two-step clustering technique that groups parking lots based on their spatiotemporal patterns. By identifying the relevant spatial and temporal characteristics of each parking lot (parking profile) and grouping them accordingly, our approach allows for the development of accurate occupancy forecasting models for a set of parking lots, thereby reducing computational costs and improving model transferability. Our models were built and evaluated using real-time parking data. The obtained correlation rates of 86% for the spatial dimension, 96% for the temporal one, and 92% for both demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed strategy in reducing model deployment costs while improving model applicability and transfer learning across parking lots.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.235
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.080 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicSmart Parking Systems ResearchFrench-language works237,207