Cited by 39Traffic Prediction and Management TechniquesTraffic control and managementTransportation Planning and Optimization

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Variation Based Online Travel Time Prediction Using Clustered Neural Networks

Yu, Jie, Chang, Gang-Len, Ho, H.W., Liu, Yue·2008·2008 11th International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems

Abstract

This paper proposes a variation-based online travel time prediction approach using clustered Neural Networks with traffic vectors extracted from raw detector data as the input variables. Different from previous studies, the proposed approach decomposes the corridor travel time into two parts: 1) the base term, which is predicted by a fuzzy membership-value-weighted average of the clustered historical data to reflect the primary traffic pattern in the corridor; and 2) the variation term, which is predicted through the calibrated cluster-based artificial neural network model to capture the actual traffic fluctuation. To evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed approach, this paper has conducted intensive numerical experiments with simulated data from the microscopic simulator CORSIM. Experimental results under various traffic volume levels have revealed the potentials for the proposed method to be applied in online corridor travel time prediction.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/itsc.2008.4732594

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In [28], the evaluation of the FF-NN travel-time variation model using RMSE and RMSP metrics showed satisfactory results.

    “The evaluation of the model is done using the RMSE and the Root Mean Square Percentage Error (RMSP) metrics, which showed satisfactory results.”

    From A Review of Machine Learning and IoT in Smart Transportation (2019) · cites this paper as [28]

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. 10.1109/ICSMC.2006.385244 · DOI
  2. 10.1109/TITS.2004.833765 · DOI
  3. 10.3141/1959-11 · DOI
  4. van lint, 2006, reliable real-time framework for short-term freeway travel time prediction, J Tramp Eng, 132, 921, 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2006)132:12(921) · DOI
  5. 10.1016/j.trc.2005.03.001 · DOI
  6. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1999)125:6(515) · DOI
  7. 10.3141/1617-23 · DOI
  8. 10.3141/1768-19 · DOI
  9. ben-akiva, 2002, network state estimation and prediction for real-time transportation management applications, Proc 81st Annual Meeting Transportation Research Board

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Yu, J., Chang, G.-L., Ho, H. W., & Liu, Y.
Affiliations
University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Venue
2008 11th International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2008-10
Pages
85-90
OpenAlex
W2169779424
Cited by
39
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
8.71
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Traffic Prediction and Management Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Traffic control and management
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Transportation Planning and Optimization
Keywords
travel time prediction, online prediction, traffic fluctuations, detector data, traffic flow

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review