MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W789383323

An Android Smartphone Application for Collecting, Sharing, and Predicting Border Crossing Wait Time

2015· article· en· W789383323 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lei Lin, Qian Wang, Adel W. Sadek, Gregory Kott

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 94th Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAndroid (operating system)Queueing theoryGlobal Positioning SystemReal-time computingComputer networkOperating system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces an Android smartphone application called the Toronto Buffalo Border Wait Time (TBBW) app, designed to collect, share and predict waiting time at the three Niagara Frontier border crossings, namely the Lewiston-Queenston Bridge, the Rainbow Bridge, and the Peace Bridge. The innovative app offers the user three types of waiting time estimates: (1) current waiting times collected at the crossings; (2) historical waiting times; and (3) future waiting time predicted for the next 15 minutes and updated every five minutes. For the current waiting time, the app can provide both the data collected by border crossing authorities as well as user-reported or “crowd-sourcing” data shared by the community of the app’s users. Reporting of the data could be done either manually or automatically through a GPS tracking function provided by the smartphone. For the historical waiting time, the app provides statistical charts and tables to help users choose the crossing with the likely shortest wait time. Future waiting times are predicted by a real-time stepwise traffic delay prediction model which consists of a short-term traffic volume forecasting model and a multi-server queueing model. To validate the prediction functionality of the app, its predictions were compared against real-world delay measurements for the entire month of May, 2014. The comparison showed that the model offered predictions with a mean absolute difference of 9.22 minutes. When considering only delays that are greater than 10 minutes, the model has a mean absolute difference of only 6.95 minutes. The ability to integrate officially reported delay estimates with crowd-sourcing data, and the ability to provide future border wait times clearly distinguish the TBBW app from others on the market.

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Board 94th Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardSame topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207