MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W625426764

Cellular Automaton Simulation of Vehicle Dynamics in Park-and-Ride Facilities

2007· article· en· W625426764 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Langston Lai, Amer Shalaby

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 86th Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPark and ridePedestrianCellular automatonTransport engineeringMetropolitan areaComputer scienceVariety (cybernetics)Simulation modelingTraffic congestionSimulationOperations researchEngineeringPublic transport
DOInot available

Abstract

Many metropolitan areas offer park-and-ride facilities to help increase transit ridership and reduce congestion. However, studies of vehicle movements within such facilities are few. A thorough understanding of the vehicle dynamics will benefit both transportation planners in forecasting demand for park-and-ride and facility designers in making objective evaluation of alternative layouts. This paper presents a microscopic park-and-ride simulation model using the Cellular Automata approach. Review of parking lot simulation models in the past are performed, and their limitations are identified and addressed in the paper. Different techniques of CA applications in traffic and pedestrian modeling are analyzed and applied in the model. The park-and-ride model is a discrete time and space model composed of five fundamental components that operate in each time step. These components together simulate a variety of driver actions such as surveying of environment, making parking choice decisions, steering and controlling of vehicles. With Kipling Station South lot in Toronto as the testing site, the AM Peak period traffic is simulated. Using vehicle arrival rate and gate processing time as model input, the model is able to generate a realistic simulation of vehicle dynamics within the facility. The parking occupation trend is comparable with the observed trend. The use of simulation in comparing two different parking lot designs is also performed to illustrate one of the many uses of the model.

Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.

How this classification was reachedexpand

The three-model screen

all 5,600 screened works →

All three models called this out of scope.

stratum: about_only · design weight: 3321.24 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Cellular-automaton simulation of vehicle dynamics in park-and-ride lots; a transportation-engineering question.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

This models vehicle movement in park-and-ride facilities, not research practice.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Transportation simulation of park-and-ride vehicle dynamics; traffic engineering, not research.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Board 86th Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardSame topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207