MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415302772 · doi:10.1155/atr/7422954

Research on Graded Lane Changing in Undersea Tunnel Exit Diversion Zones: Application of Set Pair Analysis and TOPSIS Method for Evaluation

2025· article· en· W4415302772 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fuquan Pan, Xiaojun Fan, Shuai Shao, Lixia Zhang, Siliang Luan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEvaluation Methods in Various Fields
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQingdao Technological UniversityQingdao UniversityNatural Science Foundation of Shandong Province
KeywordsTOPSISAnalytic hierarchy processSet (abstract data type)Ideal solutionEntropy (arrow of time)Process (computing)CollisionControl theory (sociology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Owing to undersea‐tunnel constraints concentrating off‐ramp maneuvers in confined zones, this study optimizes graded lane‐changing strategies to mitigate collision risks. Using the Jiaozhou‐Bay Undersea Tunnel case, we propose an innovative exit diversion area graded lane‐changing strategy comprising Transition Section I, Transition Section II, gradient section, and auxiliary lane. Six schemes were simulated via UC‐WinRoad, with driver physiological stress quantified through Tobii eye‐tracking as a novel application of pupil dynamics. Four indicators—lane‐change position, lane‐change rate, pupil diameter, and speed change—were weighted by the integrated analytic hierarchy process and entropy weight method (AHP–EWM) methodology and evaluated via the set pair analysis with the technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (SPA‐TOPSIS) theory model. Optimal Scheme E (290‐m transition I, 210‐m transition II, 120‐m gradient, and 140‐m auxiliary lane) achieved γ = 0.968, significantly reducing pupil fluctuation by 32% compared with the shortest design (Scheme A) while ensuring smoothest speed control. This demonstrates effective conflict distribution in high‐risk undersea environments, providing universally applicable design benchmarks for tunnel safety enhancement.

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)0.006
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.383 · 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 designObservational
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicEvaluation Methods in Various FieldsFrench-language works237,207