MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410191073 · doi:10.1155/atr/5195875

Optimal Graph Information Fused Graph Attention Network for Traffic Flow Forecasting

2025· article· en· W4410191073 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xing Xu, Luchen Fei, Yun Zhao, Xiaoshu Lü

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of China
KeywordsGraphComputer scienceFlow networkTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To manage and make decisions about intelligent transportation systems more efficiently, accurate traffic flow forecasting is necessary. Traffic flow forecasting has complex spatial correlation and time dependence. Most current research models are based on a predefined graph structure with a priori knowledge for prediction, which cannot well extract the hidden spatial relationships in traffic data. In this paper, we propose the Optimal Graph Information Fused Graph Attention Network (OGIF‐GAT). Specifically, we learn the actual connections between nodes and the hidden spatial relationships through the multigraph feature fusion structure. Next, we design a new graph attention network (GAT), which improves the problem of ignoring edge features in the graph structure in the traditional GAT model and considers their edge features when estimating the correlation of each neighboring node pair: the effect that the distance factor between neighboring nodes has on the spatial correlation. In addition, we use the temporal hybrid transformer (THT) to learn temporal dependencies. Extensive experiments on four public transportation datasets (PeMS04, PeMS08, PeMS‐BAY, and METR‐LA) demonstrate that our model achieves the optimal level of traffic flow prediction accuracy on all of them and is shown to have strong generalization ability. Compared to STSGCN, the mean absolute error (MAE) decreases by 7.9%, 10.3%, 33.2%, and 19.6%, respectively.

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 score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207