Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 52 references

STGAtt claims traffic flow forecasting improves when spatial and temporal dependencies are modeled in a single unified graph with attention, rather than through separate modules.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

STGAtt claims a unified spatial-temporal graph attention model with a neighborhood signal-exchanging mechanism beats state-of-the-art traffic forecasters on PEMS-BAY and SHMetro.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection The abstract promises a new SOTA for traffic forecasting, but the submitted text is corrupted past any usability—no one can referee this until a clean version appears. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2508.16685 v1 pith:6FFQYHOJ submitted 2025-08-21 cs.LG cs.AI

STGAtt: A Spatial-Temporal Unified Graph Attention Network for Traffic Flow Forecasting

Zhuding Liang , Jianxun Cui , Qingshuang Zeng , Feng Liu , Nenad Filipovic , Tijana Geroski This is my paper
classification cs.LG cs.AI
keywords traffic flow forecastinggraph attention networkspatial-temporal graphlong-range dependenciesattention mechanismPEMS-BAYSHMetrodeep learning
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to show that traffic flow can be forecast more accurately by modeling space and time together as one graph, rather than in separate spatial and temporal modules. The proposed network, STGAtt, builds a unified spatial-temporal graph and uses attention to assign weights to connections across both dimensions at once. It also splits the observed signal into neighborhood subsets and exchanges information between them, which the authors argue lets the model capture both short-range and long-range correlations. If the claim holds, traffic forecasting systems could replace multi-module architectures with a single attention-based graph and still improve on current baselines. The paper reports superior results on the PEMS-BAY and SHMetro datasets across prediction horizons, with attention-weight visualizations said to show adaptation to dynamic traffic patterns.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a spatial-temporal unified graph attention network outperforms models that separate spatial and temporal dependency modeling. The network directly learns correlations over a graph whose edges span both sensor locations and time steps, so attention scores reflect which space-time neighbors matter for the forecast. Its neighborhood-subset partitioning plus exchanging mechanism is offered as the reason it can capture short-range local patterns and long-range dependencies simultaneously, without a dedicated long-range module. On PEMS-BAY and SHMetro, the authors report that STGAtt beats state-of-the-art baselines over various prediction horizons, and they interp

What carries the argument

The central object is the Spatial-Temporal Unified Graph Attention Network (STGAtt): an attention architecture over a graph whose connections encode both spatial adjacency and temporal proximity. The attention scores are the load-bearing mechanism, letting the model dynamically weight space-time correlations in one pass. The supporting device is a partitioning of the traffic signal into neighborhood subsets with an exchanging mechanism between subsets, intended to preserve short-range detail while exposing long-range structure.

Load-bearing premise

The design assumes that cutting the traffic signal into neighborhood subsets and exchanging information between subsets preserves the very short-range and long-range correlations the model needs; if the cut discards or distorts those correlations, the reported gains would not generalize.

What would settle it

Train STGAtt with randomly assigned neighborhood subsets instead of spatially or temporally meaningful ones; if forecast error does not change, the exchanging mechanism is not doing what the paper claims. A second check: compare against a full-graph attention variant without partitioning; if its error is equal or lower, partitioning is not the source of the improvement.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Traffic forecasting architectures can dispense with separate spatial and temporal modules; one unified graph with attention covers both dimensions.
  • Attention weights learned on a unified graph can double as an interpretability map showing which sensor-time pairs drive a prediction.
  • The subset-exchange design offers a template for capturing local and global structure in other spatiotemporal forecasting tasks.
  • On PEMS-BAY and SHMetro, the claimed margin over baselines means downstream systems could plan with more accurate short- and long-horizon flow estimates.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the unified graph is the actual source of gain, model complexity may reduce compared to multi-module baselines; a controlled ablation holding parameter count fixed would test this.
  • The neighborhood-subset exchange resembles a hierarchical or multiscale treatment of space-time; a testable extension is varying subset size to see whether the optimum tracks the correlation length of the network.
  • The same architecture likely transfers to other flow problems such as crowd movement or network packet flow, but that transfer is an inference, not a claim in the paper.
  • Attention-map visualizations could be turned into a diagnostic tool for detecting anomalous traffic states, since weights should shift under congestion.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes STGAtt, a graph attention network for traffic flow forecasting. The central idea is to model spatial and temporal dependencies jointly in a single Spatial-Temporal Unified Graph, rather than in separate modules, and to partition the input traffic signal into neighborhood subsets with a novel exchanging mechanism intended to capture both short-range and long-range correlations. The abstract claims that extensive experiments on PEMS-BAY and SHMetro show superior performance over state-of-the-art baselines across prediction horizons, and that attention-weight visualizations confirm adaptability to dynamic traffic patterns. The full text supplied for review is heavily corrupted, with nearly all equations, tables, and figures unreadable, so the technical content and experimental evidence cannot be independently assessed.

Significance. If the claimed results are correct, STGAtt would be a worthwhile contribution to the spatiotemporal forecasting literature: the unified graph formulation and the neighborhood-subset exchanging mechanism are interesting architectural ideas, and the evaluation on public benchmarks (PEMS-BAY, SHMetro) is non-circular and directly comparable to prior work. The attention-visualization claim is a useful qualitative check that, if properly presented, would strengthen the paper. However, the manuscript in its current form provides no verifiable evidence for any of these claims—no readable equations, no experiment tables, no baseline configurations, and no ablations. The significance is therefore entirely conditional on a complete and legible resubmission.

major comments (4)
  1. [Full text (entire)] The submitted full text is largely mojibake/encoding-corrupted. Equations, tables, figure captions, and most prose are unreadable, and an unrelated arXiv header (arXiv:2508.16717v1, astro-ph.SR) appears mid-document. This is a load-bearing problem: the paper's central claim—state-of-the-art forecasting performance—rests entirely on the abstract because no actual model description or experimental evidence can be verified from the supplied text.
  2. [Abstract / Experiments] The abstract states 'Extensive experiments on the PEMS-BAY and SHMetro datasets demonstrate STGAtt's superior performance compared to state-of-the-art baselines across various prediction horizons,' but the provided text contains no legible metric values, prediction horizons, baseline names or configurations, standard deviations, or ablations. The SOTA claim is therefore unsupported as submitted. A complete revision must include readable result tables (e.g., MAE/RMSE/MAPE per horizon), a definition of the baseline set, and a description of experimental settings.
  3. [Abstract / Method] The architecture is described only at a high level: a Spatial-Temporal Unified Graph, an attention mechanism, neighborhood-subset partitioning, and an exchanging mechanism. No equations for graph construction, attention scoring, the exchange operation, or the prediction head are legible, nor are tensor shapes or hyperparameters. Without these, the scientific contribution cannot be evaluated, and it is impossible to determine whether the method differs from existing attention-based spatiotemporal models in a substantive way.
  4. [Method / Partitioning and exchanging mechanism] The design premise that partitioning the traffic signal into neighborhood subsets and exchanging information between them preserves both short-range and long-range correlations is not analyzed or empirically supported in any discernible portion of the text. This is a load-bearing modeling assumption. The authors should provide an ablation varying the partition size and exchange frequency, and a discussion of what information, if any, is discarded or approximated by the partitioning.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Title/Abstract] The phrase 'traffic flow observation signal' is awkward; consider 'traffic flow observations' or 'traffic flow signals.'
  2. [References] The reference list is not legible in the supplied text; citations cannot be checked for completeness or accuracy. A complete, properly formatted reference list must be included.
  3. [Figures and tables] All figures and tables appear as corrupted or unreadable placeholders. Please ensure that figure captions, table headers, and numerical entries are clearly rendered.
  4. [Document integrity] The manuscript contains an unrelated arXiv header and other extraneous content. These should be removed before resubmission.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the central claim is an empirical benchmark comparison against public datasets, not a derivation from the model's own outputs.

full rationale

The paper's strongest claim is that STGAtt outperforms state-of-the-art baselines on PEMS-BAY and SHMetro across prediction horizons. This is an external, falsifiable benchmark claim; the model is not defined in terms of those benchmark outcomes, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction in the readable portions. The abstract's supporting statement that attention-weight visualization 'confirms STGAtt's ability to adapt to dynamic traffic patterns' is interpretive and self-referential in flavor, but it is not load-bearing for the benchmark superiority claim and does not reduce any equation or metric to an input by construction. The supplied full text is largely mojibake with an unrelated arXiv header, so no equation-level derivation chain could be inspected; per the review rules, an inability to verify is not evidence of circularity, and no specific circular step can be quoted. Accordingly, no circular step is identified.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 3 axioms · 2 invented entities

From the abstract alone, the paper's contribution is architectural rather than theoretical: it introduces a unified graph representation and an exchanging mechanism with no stated free parameters or derivation. A complete audit of fitted parameters is impossible because the full text is unreadable in this artifact.

free parameters (1)
  • Model hyperparameters (attention heads, hidden dimensions, neighborhood partition size, learning rate, regularization)
    Not recoverable from the abstract; a traffic-forecasting deep network necessarily contains hand-chosen numbers, and the corrupted full text prevents enumeration of their values.
axioms (3)
  • domain assumption Traffic sensors and metro stations form a graph whose topology is sufficient to represent the relevant dependencies; the PEMS-BAY and SHMetro graphs are fixed inputs.
    The method operates on a graph representation of the road and metro network (abstract, 'unified graph representation'); if the graph omits a dependency, attention cannot recover it.
  • domain assumption Attention weights over the unified graph can express the temporal and spatial correlations needed for forecasting.
    The abstract's central mechanism is attention over a unified spatial-temporal graph; this presupposes the relevant correlations are learnable by attention.
  • domain assumption Historical traffic windows of the chosen input length suffice to predict the target horizons.
    Standard setup in the field; the abstract states the model uses traffic observation signals but does not give the window length or horizon values.
invented entities (2)
  • Spatial-Temporal Unified Graph no independent evidence
    purpose: A graph whose construction jointly encodes sensor locations and time steps so a single attention pass can weigh spatial and temporal dependencies.
    Introduced as the paper's core representation; its benefit rests on the paper's own reported results, and no external falsifiable handle is specified in the abstract.
  • Neighborhood-subset exchanging mechanism no independent evidence
    purpose: Partitions the traffic signal into neighborhood subsets and exchanges information between them to capture short-range and long-range correlations.
    Named as the novelty ('novel exchanging mechanism'), evaluated only via the paper's own benchmark numbers and attention visualizations; no independent test is described in the abstract.

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of STGAtt: A Spatial-Temporal Unified Graph Attention Network for Traffic Flow Forecasting." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6FFQYHOJ

@misc{pith2026250816685,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: STGAtt: A Spatial-Temporal Unified Graph Attention Network for Traffic Flow Forecasting},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6FFQYHOJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.16685}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Accurate and timely traffic flow forecasting is crucial for intelligent transportation systems. This paper presents a novel deep learning model, the Spatial-Temporal Unified Graph Attention Network (STGAtt). By leveraging a unified graph representation and an attention mechanism, STGAtt effectively captures complex spatial-temporal dependencies. Unlike methods relying on separate spatial and temporal dependency modeling modules, STGAtt directly models correlations within a Spatial-Temporal Unified Graph, dynamically weighing connections across both dimensions. To further enhance its capabilities, STGAtt partitions traffic flow observation signal into neighborhood subsets and employs a novel exchanging mechanism, enabling effective capture of both short-range and long-range correlations. Extensive experiments on the PEMS-BAY and SHMetro datasets demonstrate STGAtt's superior performance compared to state-of-the-art baselines across various prediction horizons. Visualization of attention weights confirms STGAtt's ability to adapt to dynamic traffic patterns and capture long-range dependencies, highlighting its potential for real-world traffic flow forecasting applications.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    A survey of intelligent transportation systems

    Sheng-hai An, Byung-Hyug Lee, and Dong-Ryeol Shin. A survey of intelligent transportation systems. In 2011 third international conference on computational intelligence, communication systems and networks , pages 332--337. IEEE, 2011

    work page 2011

  2. [2]

    A novel fuzzy deep-learning approach to traffic flow prediction with uncertain spatial--temporal data features

    Weihong Chen, Jiyao An, Renfa Li, Li Fu, Guoqi Xie, Md Zakirul Alam Bhuiyan, and Keqin Li. A novel fuzzy deep-learning approach to traffic flow prediction with uncertain spatial--temporal data features. Future generation computer systems , 89:78--88, 2018

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Multi-range attentive bicomponent graph convolutional network for traffic forecasting

    Weiqi Chen, Ling Chen, Yu Xie, Wei Cao, Yusong Gao, and Xiaojie Feng. Multi-range attentive bicomponent graph convolutional network for traffic forecasting. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence , volume 34, pages 3529--3536, 2020

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    Enhancing Traffic Flow Prediction using Outlier-Weighted AutoEncoders: Handling Real-Time Changes

    Himanshu Choudhary and Marwan Hassani. Enhancing traffic flow prediction using outlier-weighted autoencoders: Handling real-time changes. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.16596 , 2023

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    A generalization of transformer networks to graphs

    Vijay Prakash Dwivedi and Xavier Bresson. A generalization of transformer networks to graphs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2012.09699 , 2020

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  6. [6]

    Adaptive graph spatial-temporal transformer network for traffic forecasting

    Aosong Feng and Leandros Tassiulas. Adaptive graph spatial-temporal transformer network for traffic forecasting. In Proceedings of the 31st ACM international conference on information & knowledge management , pages 3933--3937, 2022

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Towards the development of intelligent transportation systems

    Lino Figueiredo, Isabel Jesus, JA Tenreiro Machado, Jose Rui Ferreira, and JL Martins De Carvalho. Towards the development of intelligent transportation systems. In ITSC 2001. 2001 IEEE intelligent transportation systems. Proceedings (Cat. No. 01TH8585) , pages 1206--1211. IEEE, 2001

    work page 2001

  8. [8]

    Attention based spatial-temporal graph convolutional networks for traffic flow forecasting

    Shengnan Guo, Youfang Lin, Ning Feng, Chao Song, and Huaiyu Wan. Attention based spatial-temporal graph convolutional networks for traffic flow forecasting. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence , volume 33, pages 922--929, 2019

    work page 2019

  9. [9]

    Explainable traffic flow prediction with large language models

    Xusen Guo, Qiming Zhang, Mingxing Peng, Meixin Zhua, et al. Explainable traffic flow prediction with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02937 , 2024

    arXiv 2024

  10. [10]

    Short-term prediction of traffic volume in urban arterials

    Mohammad M Hamed, Hashem R Al-Masaeid, and Zahi M Bani Said. Short-term prediction of traffic volume in urban arterials. Journal of Transportation Engineering , 121(3):249--254, 1995

    work page 1995

  11. [11]

    Modern machine learning methods for time series analysis

    Changquan Huang and Alla Petukhina. Modern machine learning methods for time series analysis. In Applied Time Series Analysis and Forecasting with Python , pages 341--361. Springer, 2022

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    Learning multiaspect traffic couplings by multirelational graph attention networks for traffic prediction

    Jing Huang, Kun Luo, Longbing Cao, Yuanqiao Wen, and Shuyuan Zhong. Learning multiaspect traffic couplings by multirelational graph attention networks for traffic prediction. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , 23(11):20681--20695, 2022

    work page 2022

  13. [13]

    Sts-ccl: Spatial-temporal synchronous contextual contrastive learning for urban traffic forecasting

    Lincan Li, Kaixiang Yang, Jichao Bi, and Fengji Luo. Sts-ccl: Spatial-temporal synchronous contextual contrastive learning for urban traffic forecasting. In ICASSP 2024-2024 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) , pages 6705--6709. IEEE, 2024

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    Spatial-temporal fusion graph neural networks for traffic flow forecasting

    Mengzhang Li and Zhanxing Zhu. Spatial-temporal fusion graph neural networks for traffic flow forecasting. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence , volume 35, pages 4189--4196, 2021

    work page 2021

  15. [15]

    Diffusion convolutional recurrent neural network: Data-driven traffic forecasting

    Yaguang Li, Rose Yu, Cyrus Shahabi, and Yan Liu. Diffusion convolutional recurrent neural network: Data-driven traffic forecasting. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.01926 , 2017

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  16. [16]

    Intelligent traffic flow prediction and analysis based on internet of things and big data

    Bing Liu, Tao Zhang, and Weicheng Hu. Intelligent traffic flow prediction and analysis based on internet of things and big data. Computational intelligence and neuroscience , 2022(1):6420799, 2022

    work page 2022

  17. [17]

    Physical-virtual collaboration modeling for intra-and inter-station metro ridership prediction

    Lingbo Liu, Jingwen Chen, Hefeng Wu, Jiajie Zhen, Guanbin Li, and Liang Lin. Physical-virtual collaboration modeling for intra-and inter-station metro ridership prediction. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , 23(4):3377--3391, 2020

    work page 2020

  18. [18]

    Short-term traffic flow prediction with conv-lstm

    Yipeng Liu, Haifeng Zheng, Xinxin Feng, and Zhonghui Chen. Short-term traffic flow prediction with conv-lstm. In 2017 9th international conference on wireless communications and signal processing (WCSP) , pages 1--6. IEEE, 2017

    work page 2017

  19. [19]

    Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer using shifted windows

    Ze Liu, Yutong Lin, Yue Cao, Han Hu, Yixuan Wei, Zheng Zhang, Stephen Lin, and Baining Guo. Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer using shifted windows. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision , pages 10012--10022, 2021

    work page 2021

  20. [20]

    St-trafficnet: A spatial-temporal deep learning network for traffic forecasting

    Huakang Lu, Dongmin Huang, Youyi Song, Dazhi Jiang, Teng Zhou, and Jing Qin. St-trafficnet: A spatial-temporal deep learning network for traffic forecasting. Electronics , 9(9):1474, 2020

    work page 2020

  21. [21]

    Neural Network Intelligence , 1 2021

    Microsoft . Neural Network Intelligence , 1 2021

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    An overview of model-driven and data-driven forecasting methods for smart transportation

    Sonia Mrad and Rafaa Mraihi. An overview of model-driven and data-driven forecasting methods for smart transportation. Data Analytics and Computational Intelligence: Novel Models, Algorithms and Applications , pages 159--183, 2023

    work page 2023

  23. [23]

    Dynamic time warping

    Meinard M \"u ller. Dynamic time warping. Information retrieval for music and motion , pages 69--84, 2007

    work page 2007

  24. [24]

    Traffic flow prediction for smart traffic lights using machine learning algorithms

    Alfonso Navarro-Espinoza, Oscar Roberto L \'o pez-Bonilla, Enrique Efr \'e n Garc \' a-Guerrero, Esteban Tlelo-Cuautle, Didier L \'o pez-Mancilla, Carlos Hern \'a ndez-Mej \' a, and Everardo Inzunza-Gonz \'a lez. Traffic flow prediction for smart traffic lights using machine learning algorithms. Technologies , 10(1):5, 2022

    work page 2022

  25. [25]

    Traffic flow prediction using support vector regression

    Nidhi Nidhi and DK Lobiyal. Traffic flow prediction using support vector regression. International Journal of Information Technology , 14(2):619--626, 2022

    work page 2022

  26. [26]

    Prospects and challenges of metaverse application in data-driven intelligent transportation systems

    Judith Nkechinyere Njoku, Cosmas Ifeanyi Nwakanma, Gabriel Chukwunonso Amaizu, and Dong-Seong Kim. Prospects and challenges of metaverse application in data-driven intelligent transportation systems. IET Intelligent Transport Systems , 17(1):1--21, 2023

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    Dynamic prediction of traffic volume through kalman filtering theory

    Iwao Okutani and Yorgos J Stephanedes. Dynamic prediction of traffic volume through kalman filtering theory. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological , 18(1):1--11, 1984

    work page 1984

  28. [28]

    Adaptive bayesian network for traffic flow prediction

    Alessandra Pascale and Monica Nicoli. Adaptive bayesian network for traffic flow prediction. In 2011 IEEE Statistical Signal Processing Workshop (SSP) , pages 177--180. IEEE, 2011

    work page 2011

  29. [29]

    Artificial intelligence-based traffic flow prediction: a comprehensive review

    Sayed A Sayed, Yasser Abdel-Hamid, and Hesham Ahmed Hefny. Artificial intelligence-based traffic flow prediction: a comprehensive review. Journal of Electrical Systems and Information Technology , 10(1):13, 2023

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    Spatial-temporal synchronous graph convolutional networks: A new framework for spatial-temporal network data forecasting

    Chao Song, Youfang Lin, Shengnan Guo, and Huaiyu Wan. Spatial-temporal synchronous graph convolutional networks: A new framework for spatial-temporal network data forecasting. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence , volume 34, pages 914--921, 2020

    work page 2020

  31. [31]

    Sequence to sequence learning with neural networks

    I Sutskever. Sequence to sequence learning with neural networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.3215 , 2014

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  32. [32]

    Combining kohonen maps with arima time series models to forecast traffic flow

    Mascha Van Der Voort, Mark Dougherty, and Susan Watson. Combining kohonen maps with arima time series models to forecast traffic flow. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies , 4(5):307--318, 1996

    work page 1996

  33. [33]

    Attention is all you need

    A Vaswani. Attention is all you need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 2017

    2017

  34. [34]

    Traffic flow prediction based on bp neural network

    Tuo Wang, Beibei Zhang, Wei Wei, Robertas Dama s evi c ius, and Rafal Scherer. Traffic flow prediction based on bp neural network. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Industrial Design (AIID) , pages 15--19. IEEE, 2021

    work page 2021

  35. [35]

    Modeling and forecasting vehicular traffic flow as a seasonal arima process: Theoretical basis and empirical results

    Billy M Williams and Lester A Hoel. Modeling and forecasting vehicular traffic flow as a seasonal arima process: Theoretical basis and empirical results. Journal of transportation engineering , 129(6):664--672, 2003

    work page 2003

  36. [36]

    Multi-scale spatio-temporal attention networks for network-scale traffic learning and forecasting

    Cong Wu, Hui Ding, Zhongwang Fu, and Ning Sun. Multi-scale spatio-temporal attention networks for network-scale traffic learning and forecasting. Sensors , 24(17):5543, 2024

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    Graph wavenet for deep spatial-temporal graph modeling

    Zonghan Wu, Shirui Pan, Guodong Long, Jing Jiang, and Chengqi Zhang. Graph wavenet for deep spatial-temporal graph modeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.00121 , 2019

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1906

  38. [38]

    Spatiotemporal synchronous dynamic graph attention network for traffic flow forecasting

    Dawen Xia, Zhan Lin, Yan Chen, Yang Hu, Yantao Li, and Huaqing Li. Spatiotemporal synchronous dynamic graph attention network for traffic flow forecasting. Neural Computing and Applications , pages 1--15, 2024

    work page 2024

  39. [39]

    Overview of machine learning-based traffic flow prediction

    Zhibo Xing, Mingxia Huang, and Dan Peng. Overview of machine learning-based traffic flow prediction. Digital Transportation and Safety , 2(3):164--175, 2023

    work page 2023

  40. [40]

    Spatial-temporal transformer networks for traffic flow forecasting

    Mingxing Xu, Wenrui Dai, Chunmiao Liu, Xing Gao, Weiyao Lin, Guo-Jun Qi, and Hongkai Xiong. Spatial-temporal transformer networks for traffic flow forecasting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.02908 , 2020

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  41. [41]

    Modeling spatial-temporal dynamics for traffic prediction

    Huaxiu Yao, Xianfeng Tang, Hua Wei, Guanjie Zheng, Yanwei Yu, and Zhenhui Li. Modeling spatial-temporal dynamics for traffic prediction. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.01254 , 1(9), 2018

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  42. [42]

    Do transformers really perform badly for graph representation? Advances in neural information processing systems , 34:28877--28888, 2021

    Chengxuan Ying, Tianle Cai, Shengjie Luo, Shuxin Zheng, Guolin Ke, Di He, Yanming Shen, and Tie-Yan Liu. Do transformers really perform badly for graph representation? Advances in neural information processing systems , 34:28877--28888, 2021

    work page 2021

  43. [43]

    Spatio-temporal graph convolutional networks: A deep learning framework for traffic forecasting

    Bing Yu, Haoteng Yin, and Zhanxing Zhu. Spatio-temporal graph convolutional networks: A deep learning framework for traffic forecasting. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.04875 , 2017

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  44. [44]

    Sthsgcn: Spatial-temporal heterogeneous and synchronous graph convolution network for traffic flow prediction

    Xian Yu, Yin-Xin Bao, and Quan Shi. Sthsgcn: Spatial-temporal heterogeneous and synchronous graph convolution network for traffic flow prediction. Heliyon , 9(9), 2023

    work page 2023

  45. [45]

    Dynamic spatial-temporal memory augmentation network for traffic prediction

    Huibing Zhang, Qianxin Xie, Zhaoyu Shou, and Yunhao Gao. Dynamic spatial-temporal memory augmentation network for traffic prediction. Sensors , 24(20):6659, 2024

    work page 2024

  46. [46]

    Data-driven intelligent transportation systems: A survey

    Junping Zhang, Fei-Yue Wang, Kunfeng Wang, Wei-Hua Lin, Xin Xu, and Cheng Chen. Data-driven intelligent transportation systems: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , 12(4):1624--1639, 2011

    work page 2011

  47. [47]

    Urban traffic flow congestion prediction based on a data-driven model

    Kai Zhang, Zixuan Chu, Jiping Xing, Honggang Zhang, and Qixiu Cheng. Urban traffic flow congestion prediction based on a data-driven model. Mathematics , 11(19):4075, 2023

    work page 2023

  48. [48]

    An improved k-nearest neighbor model for short-term traffic flow prediction

    Lun Zhang, Qiuchen Liu, Wenchen Yang, Nai Wei, and Decun Dong. An improved k-nearest neighbor model for short-term traffic flow prediction. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences , 96:653--662, 2013

    work page 2013

  49. [49]

    T-gcn: A temporal graph convolutional network for traffic prediction

    Ling Zhao, Yujiao Song, Chao Zhang, Yu Liu, Pu Wang, Tao Lin, Min Deng, and Haifeng Li. T-gcn: A temporal graph convolutional network for traffic prediction. IEEE transactions on intelligent transportation systems , 21(9):3848--3858, 2019

    work page 2019

  50. [50]

    Gman: A graph multi-attention network for traffic prediction

    Chuanpan Zheng, Xiaoliang Fan, Cheng Wang, and Jianzhong Qi. Gman: A graph multi-attention network for traffic prediction. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence , volume 34, pages 1234--1241, 2020

    work page 2020

  51. [51]

    Informer: Beyond efficient transformer for long sequence time-series forecasting

    Haoyi Zhou, Shanghang Zhang, Jieqi Peng, Shuai Zhang, Jianxin Li, Hui Xiong, and Wancai Zhang. Informer: Beyond efficient transformer for long sequence time-series forecasting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2012.07436 , 2020

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  52. [52]

    Kst-gcn: A knowledge-driven spatial-temporal graph convolutional network for traffic forecasting

    Jiawei Zhu, Xing Han, Hanhan Deng, Chao Tao, Ling Zhao, Pu Wang, Tao Lin, and Haifeng Li. Kst-gcn: A knowledge-driven spatial-temporal graph convolutional network for traffic forecasting. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , 23(9):15055--15065, 2022

    work page 2022

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 5, 2026.