BUS TRAVEL TIME PREDICTION MODEL FOR DYNAMIC OPERATIONS CONTROL AND PASSENGER INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) and Automatic Passengers Counters (APC) systems have been increasingly implemented by transit agencies for the real time monitoring of transit vehicles and automatic counting of passengers boarding and alighting at bus stops. As a result, a vast amount of potentially online data related to transit operation could be obtained from these systems. The emphasis of this research effort was on using AVL and APC dynamic data to develop a bus travel time model capable of providing real time information on bus arrival times to passengers, via traveler information services and to transit controllers for the application of proactive control strategies. The developed model is based on two Kalman filter algorithms for the prediction of running times and dwell times alternately in an integrated framework. The AVL and APC data used were obtained for a specific bus route in Downtown Toronto. The performance of the developed prediction model was tested using “hold out ” data and other data from microsimulation representing different scenarios of bus operation along the investigated route using the “VISSIM ” microsimulation software package. The Kalman Filter algorithm outperformed all other developed models in terms of accuracy, demonstrating the dynamic ability to update itself based on new data that reflected the changing characteristics of the transit-operating environment.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".