MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417344491 · doi:10.1007/s10462-025-11400-w

A review of network delay prediction and advances in large language models for air traffic

2025· article· en· W4417344491 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueArtificial Intelligence Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAir Traffic Management and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceChina Scholarship CouncilGovernment of Jiangsu ProvinceNanjing University of Aeronautics and AstronauticsChina Postdoctoral Science Foundation
KeywordsCausal inferenceCausality (physics)Deep learningArtificial neural networkInferenceAir traffic controlNetwork topologyGraphLearning network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traffic network delays seriously affect the air transportation system’s safety, economy, and efficiency, and have always been a global concern. Flight delays usually propagate within airport networks, causing subsequent flights to be delayed. However, existing works lack in considering network causality, and the incorporation of emerging large language models (LLMs). Thus, this paper endeavours to examine the literature on network delay prediction that combines different background knowledge with journal paper publishing data. Particularly, the network delay prediction methods are categorized into four aspects: classic methods without explicit network topology modelling, traditional explicit network-based prediction methods, emerging deep learning methods, and the application of LLMs in transportation. Classic methods without explicit network topology modelling, including statistical analysis, operations research, traditional machine learning and causal inference without network structures, offer interpretable baselines but fail to capture the complexity and nonlinearity of air traffic systems. Traditional explicit network-based prediction methods often approach air traffic systems through frameworks such as complex networks and queuing theory, with an increasing focus on causal relationship analysis. However, these methods fall short in capturing the spatiotemporal dependencies of network delays, particularly in modelling spatiotemporal causality. In contrast, emerging deep learning methods have advanced significantly, enabling the construction of spatiotemporal causal networks and improving the accuracy of network delay prediction. In addition, some future trends are analyzed. It is concluded that graph neural networks with causality and emerging deep learning methods (e.g., spatiotemporal GCN) are identified as essential directions. Moreover, a conceptual AirTraffic LLM is suggested via a novel Spatial-Temporal Causal Large Language Model (STC-LLM) framework for high-precision flight delay prediction, which requires further experimental validation and real-world testing. Nevertheless, issues such as data privacy, model opacity, and high computational costs must be carefully addressed when applying LLMs. Finally, the findings are expected to enhance understanding of delay propagation among researchers, practitioners, and policymakers, while providing insights and guidance to airports, airlines, and air traffic control.

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.

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)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.272 · 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