MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413019567 · doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2025.07.092

Data-Efficient Vehicular Fuel Rate Estimation Via Transfer Learning Using a Nonlinear-Autoregressive-Exogenous Neural Network

2025· article· en· W4413019567 on OpenAlexafffund
Amirreza Yasami, Mohamadali Tofigh, Li Jiang, Hooman Abediasl, Charles Robert Koch, Mahdi Shahbakhti

Bibliographic record

VenueIFAC-PapersOnLine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle emissions and performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of AlbertaTransport Canada
KeywordsAutoregressive modelArtificial neural networkNonlinear systemNonlinear autoregressive exogenous modelComputer scienceEstimationTransfer of learningTransfer (computing)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsEconometricsEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fuel estimation is crucial for intelligent transportation systems to minimize fuel consumption, thereby reducing costs and environmental impacts. However, developing accurate data-driven fuel-estimation models requires extensive data, which is usually costly and time-consuming to collect for feet systems with a large number of vehicles. This paper presents an inductive transfer learning (TL) method for fuel rate estimation to alleviate the large fuel data measurement requirement. First, a dynamic neural network based on the Nonlinear Auto-Regressive Exogenous (NARX) approach is trained for a Peterbilt 579 class 8 haul truck as the base model, using on-road fuel consumption measured data. Afterward, using the TL method, the developed fuel-estimation model is leveraged to three different vehicles with various engine sizes and types, including a Ford F-350, a hybrid Ford Fusion, and a turbocharged Ford Escape. Extensive analyses illustrated that the transferred target models require training data as minimal as 3% (3km) of the total data used for training the base model to achieve prediction accuracy comparable to the base model. Moreover, compared to developed conventional models, the TL-based target models for the Ford Fusion, Ford Escape, and Ford F-350 demonstrate average improvements of 70%, 71%, and 73% in terms of Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Rooted Mean Squared Error (RMSE), and training time, 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.241 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIFAC-PapersOnLineSame topicVehicle emissions and performanceFrench-language works237,207