{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03359932801343973, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0008399832003359933, 'mean_word_length': 5.786324786324786, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Estimation of annual average daily traffic (AADT) data for low-volume roads: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Background: The annual average daily traffic (AADT) data from road segments are critical for roadway projects, especially with the decision-making processes about operations, travel demand, safety-performance evaluation, and maintenance. Regular updates help to determine traffic patterns for decision-making. Unfortunately, the luxury of having permanent recorders on all road segments, especially low-volume roads, is virtually impossible. Consequently, insufficient AADT information is acquired for planning and new developments. A growing number of statistical, mathematical, and machine-learning algorithms have helped estimate AADT data values accurately, to some extent, at both sampled and unsampled locations on low-volume roadways. In some cases, roads with no representative AADT data are resolved with information from roadways with similar traffic patterns. Methods: This study adopted an integrative approach with a combined systematic literature review (SLR) and meta-analysis (MA) to identify and to evaluate the performance, the sources of error, and possible advantages and disadvantages of the techniques utilized most for estimating AADT data. As a result, an SLR of various peer-reviewed articles and reports was completed to answer four research questions. Results: The study showed that the most frequent techniques utilized to estimate AADT data on low-volume roadways were regression, artificial neural-network techniques, travel-demand models, the traditional factor approach, and spatial interpolation techniques. These AADT data-estimating methods’ performance was subjected to meta-analysis. Three studies were completed: R squared, root means square error, and mean absolute percentage error. The meta-analysis results indicated a mixed summary effect: 1. all studies were equal; 2. all studies were not comparable. However, the integrated qualitative and quantitative approach indicated that spatial-interpolation (Kriging) methods outperformed the others. Conclusions: Spatial-interpolation methods may be selected over others to generate accurate AADT data by practitioners at all levels for decision making. Besides, the resulting cross-validation statistics give statistics like the other methods' performance measures.