TMS-GNN: Traffic-aware Multistep Graph Neural Network for bus passenger flow prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bus network plays a critical role in urban transportation affecting the use of private vehicles, traffic congestion, and urban accessibility. The accurate prediction of bus passenger flow is key to improving transit passenger experience and increasing the efficiency of bus network operations. In line with recent advances in deep learning for passenger flow prediction, graph neural networks (GNNs) have become increasingly popular due to their ability to account for the network structure between stops. Existing GNN-based models for bus passenger flow prediction, however, face several limitations. First, they do not take into account some distinctive characteristics of bus networks, such as their coexistence with vehicular traffic and their high sensitivity to urban traffic conditions. Moreover, sequence prediction models that have been widely applied to multistep passenger flow prediction suffer from a critical issue, called “exposure bias.” This results in the propagation and accumulation of errors through prediction steps while making predictions for farther time horizons. To address these issues, this study presents the Traffic-Aware multistep Graph Neural Network (TMS-GNN) model with Scheduled Sampling, a graph-based deep-learning framework designed to forecast multistep bus passenger flows at individual stops across a bus network. The model takes into account factors such as bus stop connectivity, urban traffic impacts, and multi-dimensional temporal patterns; and addresses exposure bias by employing a curriculum learning strategy called Scheduled Sampling. The comparison between the proposed model and other popular baseline models on two real-world networks with different geographical and urban patterns in Canada and USA shows that TMS-GNN outperforms the baselines in both the overall network-wide task, as well as multistep prediction. Also, to verify the contribution of the proposed components of the model, an ablation study is conducted. The results of the ablation study validate the design choices as well. • Built traffic-aware graph model for bus passenger flow, reflecting real-world dynamics • Introduced robust multi-step prediction to reduce error accumulation over time steps • Proposed fusion module to capture multi-scale temporal trends in flow predictions • Demonstrated robustness via tests on two datasets, outperforming existing models
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".