Calibrating car-following models via Bayesian dynamic regression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".