ArticleUrban informatics2022
Traffic flow prediction using bi-directional gated recurrent unit method.
Article in Urban informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhanced multi objective graph learning approach for optimizing traffic speed prediction on spatial and temporal features.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Accurate V2X traffic prediction with deep learning architectures.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traffic flow prediction plays an important role in intelligent transportation systems. To accurately capture the complex non-linear temporal characteristics of traffic flow, this paper adopts a Bi-directional Gated Recurrent Unit (Bi-GRU) model in traffic flow prediction. Compared to Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU), which can memorize information from the previous sequence, this model can memorize the traffic flow information in both previous and subsequent sequence. To demonstrate the model's performance, a set of real case data at 1-hour intervals from 5 working days was used, wherein the dataset was separated into training and validation. To improve data quality, an augmented dickey-fuller unit root test and differential processing were performed before model training. Four benchmark models were used, including the Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA), Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory (Bi-LSTM), and GRU. The prediction results show the superior performance of Bi-GRU. The Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE), and Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of the Bi-GRU model are 30.38, 9.88%, and 23.35, respectively. The prediction accuracy of LSTM, Bi-LSTM, GRU, and Bi-GRU, which belong to deep learning methods, is significantly higher than that of the traditional ARIMA model. The MAPE difference of Bi-GRU and GRU is 0.48% which is a small prediction error value. The results show that the prediction accuracy of the peak period is higher than that of the low peak. The Bi-GRU model has a certain lag on traffic flow prediction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.