MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7099003548

The Highway Capacity Manual Delay Formula for Signalized Intersections BY RAHMI AKCELIK

2014· article· en· W7099003548 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntersection (aeronautics)Highway Capacity ManualRetardTravel timeRoad traffic
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

he purpose of this article is to compare the 1985 U.S. Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) ’ delay for”mula for signalized intersections with the Australian ’ and Canadian3 formulas and to present a generalized form that embraces them all. The aim is to promote international cooperation in this area of research and development. Compared with the other delay formulas, the HCM formula predicts higher delays for oversaturated conditions, and the differences between the prediction from the HCM formula and the other formulas increase with increasing degree of saturation. An alternative to the HCM delay formula, which matches the other formulas for oversaturated conditions, is given. The alternative formula, derived from the generalized formula, predicts delays that are very close to those predicted by the original HCM formula for undersaturated conditions, and at the same time predicts delays that are very close to the results from the Australian and Canadian formulas for oversaturated conditions. The HCM signalized intersection chapter states that its delay formula “yields reasonable results for values of.x between 0.0 and 1.0... The equation may be used with caution for values of x up to 1.2, but delay estimates for higher values are not recommended. ” Although traffic engineers do not design for oversaturation, a delay formula that can be expected to give reasonable results for oversaturated, as well as undersaturated conditions, is preferred because the limitations of this type of formula are often forgotten and the formula misused in practice (e.g., in evaluating alternative designs or in stating benefits from improvements to an existing oversaturated intersection). IThe HCM formula predicts higher delays for oversaturted conditions. The generalized formula could be calibrated to develop a more suitable formula for U.S. conditions. It might also be possible to calibrate it for vehicle-actuated and fixed-time signals separately. Various other issues related to this discussion and briefly mentioned in this article will be discussed elsewhere.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change→French-language works237,207→