MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399903090 · doi:10.1016/j.trc.2024.104719

Calibrating car-following models via Bayesian dynamic regression

2024· article· en· W4399903090 on OpenAlexafffund
Chengyuan Zhang, Wenshuo Wang, Lijun Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Part C Emerging Technologies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentre interuniversitaire de recherche sur les reseaux d'entreprise, la logistique et le transport
KeywordsBayesian probabilityRegressionBayesian linear regressionRegression analysisComputer scienceStatisticsEconometricsBayesian inferenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Car-following behavior modeling is critical for understanding traffic flow dynamics and developing high-fidelity microscopic simulation models. Most existing impulse-response car-following models prioritize computational efficiency and interpretability by using a parsimonious nonlinear function based on immediate preceding state observations. However, this approach disregards historical information, limiting its ability to explain real-world driving data. Consequently, serially correlated residuals are commonly observed when calibrating these models with actual trajectory data, hindering their ability to capture complex and stochastic phenomena. To address this limitation, we propose a dynamic regression framework incorporating time series models, such as autoregressive processes, to capture error dynamics. This statistically rigorous calibration outperforms the simple assumption of independent errors and enables more accurate simulation and prediction by leveraging higher-order historical information. We validate the effectiveness of our framework using HighD and OpenACC data, demonstrating improved probabilistic simulations. In summary, our framework preserves the parsimonious nature of traditional car-following models while offering enhanced probabilistic simulations. The code of this work is available at https://github.com/Chengyuan-Zhang/IDM_Bayesian_Calibration.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.731

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations23
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Part C Emerging TechnologiesSame topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207