MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W592595758

Neighbour Corridors Travel Time Estimation: Concept and a Case Study

2012· article· en· W592595758 on OpenAlex
Mohamed El Esawey, Tarek Sayed

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in transportation studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMean absolute percentage errorDowntownArtificial neural networkEstimationTravel timeComputer scienceStatisticsTransport engineeringData collectionGeographyEngineeringMathematicsMachine learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An approach is presented to estimate corridor travel time in urban areas using available data of a nearby corridor. The purpose is to improve the efficiency of real-time traveler information systems when the number of data collection sensors is limited. Field travel time data were collected for two corridors in downtown Vancouver, British Columbia. The association between the travel times of the two corridors was found significant. Models were then developed to estimate travel times on one corridor using data of the other corridor. The developed models included regression, Artificial Neural Network (ANN), Neuro-fuzzy, and K-Nearest Neighbours (KNN). The estimation accuracy was considered satisfactory as the Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE) of all models ranged between 13.7% and 17.6%. It was concluded that the concept of estimating travel time from nearby corridors is promising. The type of modeling technique had a little impact on the results with the KNN method producing slightly better results.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.431
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.276 · 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