mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Distil the informative essence of loop detector data set: Is network-level traffic forecasting hungry for more data?

arXiv 2310.20366 ↗First posted 31 Oct 2023cs.LG cs.SY eess.SYcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Network-level traffic condition forecasting has been intensively studied for decades. Although prediction accuracy has been continuously improved with emerging deep learning models and ever-expanding traffic data, traffic forecasting still faces many challenges in practice. These challenges include the robustness of data-driven models, the inherent unpredictability of traffic dynamics, and whether further improvement of traffic forecasting requires more sensor data. In this paper, we focus on this latter question and particularly on data from loop detectors. To answer this, we propose an uncertainty-aware traffic forecasting framework to explore how many samples of loop data are truly effective for training forecasting models. Firstly, the model design combines traffic flow theory with graph neural networks, ensuring the robustness of prediction and uncertainty quantification. Secondly, evidential learning is employed to quantify different sources of uncertainty in a single pass. The estimated uncertainty is used to "distil" the essence of the dataset that sufficiently covers the information content. Results from a case study of a highway network around Amsterdam show that, from 2018 to 2021, more than 80% of the data during daytime can be removed. The remaining 20% samples have equal prediction power for training models. This result suggests that indeed large traffic datasets can be subdivided into significantly smaller but equally informative datasets. From these findings, we conclude that the proposed methodology proves valuable in evaluating large traffic datasets' true information content. Further extensions, such as extracting smaller, spatially non-redundant datasets, are possible with this method.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 Oct 2023.

Builds on

16 of 35 references.

References · 16

  1. 2017Graph Attention Networkscited by 8,854
  2. 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,416
  3. 2014Learning Phrase Representations using RNN Encoder-Decoder for Statistical Machine Translationcited by 4,016
  4. 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,888
  5. 2017Revisiting Unreasonable Effectiveness of Data in Deep Learning Eracited by 916
  6. 2020Simple and Deep Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 857
  7. 2020A Review of Uncertainty Quantification in Deep Learning: Techniques, Applications and Challengescited by 813
  8. 2015Scheduled Sampling for Sequence Prediction with Recurrent Neural Networkscited by 779
  9. 2022Dataset Distillation by Matching Training Trajectoriescited by 437
  10. 2019Deep Evidential Regressioncited by 354
  11. 2019Causal Confusion in Imitation Learningcited by 286
  12. 2021Graph Neural Network for Traffic Forecasting: A Surveycited by 260
4 more
  1. 2019Deep Learning vs. Traditional Computer Visioncited by 94
  2. 2020Natural Language Processing Advancements By Deep Learning: A Surveycited by 50
  3. 2020Regression Prior Networkscited by 28
  4. 2020Deep Learning for Road Traffic Forecasting: Does it Make a Difference?cited by 21

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.

1 paper.