MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383368616 · doi:10.18178/ijml.2023.13.3.1135

Deep-Racing: An Embedded Deep Neural Network (EDNN) Model to Predict the Winning Strategy in Formula One Racing

2023· article· en· W4383368616 on OpenAlexaff
Syeda Sitara, Wishal Fatima, Jennifer Johrendt

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Machine Learning · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSports Analytics and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceEconometricsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an embedded deep neural network model to predict the driver rank and the optimum pitstop strategy.In formula one racing, the race strategy is critical to determine optimal pitstops and finish the race in the best possible position.Considering a system with only one racing car, the pitstop can be decided just by looking at the degradation of the tires.But in reality, the formula one environment is more complex, and multiple probabilistic factors (like safety car phases, opponent strategy, and overtaking) influence the pitstop decision.Deep-Racing is a prediction and decision algorithm for formula one racing cars that uses neural networks with embedding layers.The algorithm is developed after carefully reviewing formula one racing and appropriate statistical modeling techniques, which can be trained for pre-race and real-time predictions during the race using the data from previous laps.Deep-Racing has the potential to help team principals and race engineers to decide the optimized strategy for making pitstops.It is trained on the data from seasons 2015-2022.This project is the first to utilize an embedded layer in motorsport racing predictions, and the results show an improvement in predictive accuracy compared with the previously available literature.This paper significantly expands the previous research in this field and proposes trends in the data available from the latest seasons.

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)0.002
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 score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.505

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Machine LearningSame topicSports Analytics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207