MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403919342 · doi:10.1109/sm63044.2024.10733401

ASENet: A Deep Learning Approach to Predict Traffic Speed Compliance During Automated Speed Enforcement

2024· article· en· W4403919342 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sifatul Mostafi, Khalid Elgazzar, Khalil Barakzai, Dillon Koolhaas

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsRegional Municipality of DurhamOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompliance (psychology)Computer scienceEnforcementArtificial intelligenceReal-time computingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Speed enforcement is one of the most widely used countermeasures to curb speed violations. Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE) not only supplements traditional traffic enforcement but also provides valuable data on traffic violations for safety research. Numerous evaluations have been performed to assess the effectiveness of ASE programs in reducing speed violations. However, there is a significant gap in the research community regarding the prediction of traffic speed compliance during different ASE enforcement periods. To address this gap, this paper presents the first study to predict traffic speed compliance during various automated enforcement periods using a novel deep learning architecture. We collected traffic data from different ASE sites in the Durham Region of Ontario, Canada, covering the warning period, the active-ASE period, and the post-ASE period across multiple rotations. We categorized the features influencing changes in traffic speed compliance using Analysis of Variance and Ordinary Least Squares Regression. Performance evaluations demonstrate that the proposed deep learning approach can predict traffic speed compliance during different periods of automated speed enforcement with a very high degree of confidence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207