Convolutional Low-Rank Tensor Representation for Structural Missing Traffic Data Imputation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, low-rank tensor completion (LRTC) methods by exploiting the global low-rankness of the target tensor have shown great potential for traffic data imputation. However, in real-world transportation networks, traffic data usually suffer from more complicated structural missing patterns than random-missing patterns, e.g., tube-missing patterns due to disruptions in wireless connections or slice-missing mechanism caused by sensor maintenance. As the naturally low-rank structure of traffic data in several missing scenarios, the existing LRTC methods indeed refrain from desirable performance for imputing traffic data. To tackle the complicated missing scenarios, we propose a convolutional low-rank tensor representation (CLRTR). Especially, CLRTR represents each unfolding matrix of the tensor as a sum of convolutions between two-dimensional (2D) filters and the corresponding low-rank coefficients, which allows us to simultaneously reveal the local patterns and the low-rankness of traffic data. Based on the CLRTR, we introduce the corresponding low-rank metric CLRTR-rank. Based on the suggested low-rank metric, we propose a traffic data imputation model that is well-suited to the complicated missing data scenarios. To implement the resultant imputation model, we design the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) based algorithm with a theoretical convergence guarantee. Extensive numerical experiments on several real-world traffic datasets for both traffic data imputation and downstream traffic data prediction highlight the superiority of our model over the existing state-of-the-art matrix/tensor models for extensive missing scenarios.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".