MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415819655 · doi:10.3390/ijgi14110434

Multimodal Spatiotemporal Deep Fusion for Highway Traffic Accident Prediction in Toronto: A Case Study and Roadmap

2025· article· en· W4415819655 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Danya Qutaishat, Songnian Li

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSensor fusionIntelligent transportation systemFusionCrashFeature (linguistics)Road trafficHotspot (geology)Road surface

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A proactive traffic safety approach provides a forward-looking method for managing traffic and preventing accidents by identifying high-risk conditions before they occur. Previous studies have often focused on historical crash data or demographic factors, relying on limited single-source inputs and neglecting spatial, temporal, and environmental interactions. This study develops a multimodal spatiotemporal deep fusion framework for predicting traffic accidents in Toronto, Canada, by integrating spatial, temporal, environmental, and lighting features within a proactive modeling structure. Three fusion approaches were investigated: (1) environmental feature fusion, (2) extended fusion incorporating lighting and road surface conditions, and (3) a double-stage fusion combining all feature types. The double-stage fusion achieved the best performance, reducing RMSE from 0.50 to 0.41 and outperforming conventional models across multiple error metrics. The framework supports fine-grained hotspot analysis, improves proactive traffic safety management, and provides a transferable roadmap for applying deep fusion in real-world intelligent transportation and urban planning systems.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

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 communication0.0000.002
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS International Journal of Geo-InformationSame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207