Road Rescue Demand Prediction for the Improvement of Traffic System Resilience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Road rescue can provide rescue services for faulty vehicles, such as fuel delivery, tire replacement, battery connection, on-site repair, clearing, and towing, which plays an important role in reducing casualties and property losses in traffic accidents. Based on the historical data of road rescue, this paper analyzes the influencing factors of the road rescue demand and establishes a prediction model of the road rescue demand without data grouping. In order to further improve the prediction accuracy, the data are divided into nine groups according to the importance of the influencing factors, and nine submodels are established for the nine groups of data. When the influencing factors are known, the submodel corresponding to the most important influencing factor is selected to predict the road rescue demand. A case study in Beijing is used to verify the effectiveness and superiority of the proposed models, which can effectively predict the road rescue demand under various conditions, including the normal condition, the Spring Festival, National Day, the three-day holiday (e.g., Qingming, May Day, the Dragon Boat Festival, the Mid-Autumn Festival, and New Year’s Day,), and extreme weather (e.g., low temperature, high temperature, heavy snow, heavy rain, and rainstorm). The research findings can provide scientific basis for the rescue department to deploy rescue equipment and rescue personnel in advance, raise the efficiency and quality of rescue, and improve the resilience of the transportation system.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".