Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate calibration of car-following models is essential for understanding human driving behaviors and implementing high-fidelity microscopic simulations. This work proposes a memory-augmented Bayesian calibration technique to capture both uncertainty in the model parameters and the temporally correlated behavior discrepancy between model predictions and observed data. Specifically, we characterize the parameter uncertainty using a hierarchical Bayesian framework and model the temporally correlated errors using Gaussian processes. We apply the Bayesian calibration technique to the intelligent driver model (IDM) and develop a novel stochastic car-following model named memory-augmented IDM (MA-IDM). To evaluate the effectiveness of MA-IDM, we compare the proposed MA-IDM with Bayesian IDM in which errors are assumed to be i.i.d., and our simulation results based on the HighD dataset show that MA-IDM can generate more realistic driving behaviors and provide better uncertainty quantification than Bayesian IDM. By analyzing the lengthscale parameter of the Gaussian process, we also show that taking the driving actions from the past five seconds into account can be helpful in modeling and simulating the human driver’s car-following behaviors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".