Network-Wide Freeway Speed Nowcasting and Forecasting from Sparse Fixed Sensors with a Probe-Supervised Graph Convolutional Recurrent Network
Organizations: North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington, TX 76011, USA
Abstract
Traffic agencies need current and near-future speeds on every link of their network, but their fixed sensors cover only part of it. We study joint nowcasting and next-hour forecasting of hourly speeds on all 4{,}127 directional freeway links of the Dallas--Fort Worth region from sensors on 643 links (15.6%). Historical probe-vehicle data supervise every link in training; only sensor readings are used at inference. We call this setting probe-supervised sparse sensing. We propose GCRN+, a graph convolutional recurrent network that predicts deviations from a historical speed profile. It combines a parameter-free, direction-aware kernel interpolation of sensor anomalies, used as input features and as an output baseline, with a diffusion-convolutional GRU on the directed road graph, a low-rank adaptive graph and learnable link embeddings. It scales linearly with network size and trains on a CPU. Sensor readings are emulated from probe speeds, which isolates spatio-temporal inference from detector calibration. On four held-out test days, GCRN+ attains an RMSE of 2.21mph for the current hour and 2.39mph for the next hour on unsensored links, against 3.23mph for the historical average. The best baselines that use the same interpolation features reach 2.53 and 2.75mph. Adapted recent models without these features (STID, STAEformer, ImputeFormer, MoGERNN) reach at best 2.54 and 2.53~mph; this comparison is between complete pipelines rather than architectures. GCRN+ is best in every distance band except links not connected to any sensor through the road graph. Ablations within one recurrent backbone attribute most of the gain to the link embeddings and the adaptive graph, which can be trained because probe labels exist for every link. For congestion detection on unsensored links, recall rises from 77% (historical average) and 86% (best competitor) to 89% at aprecision of 0.94.
Figures & tables
| Now ( ) | Next hour ( ) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 100% (643) | 50% (322) | 25% (161) | 100% (643) | 50% (322) | 25% (161) |
| HA | 3.23 | 3.26 | 3.26 | 3.23 | 3.26 | 3.26 |
| HA + interpolation | 2.93 | 3.01 | 3.10 | 3.18 | 3.24 | 3.25 |
| GBDT (interp. features) | 2.54 | 2.60 | 2.70 | 2.80 | 2.80 | 2.82 |
| GCRN | 2.53 | 2.61 | 2.72 | 2.74 | 2.78 | 2.83 |
| ImputeFormer | 2.62 | 2.72 | 2.76 | 2.69 | 2.79 | 2.86 |
Appendix figures & tables2 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Shared training settings | |
| Input window / horizon | 3 hours / current + next hour |
| Optimiser | Adam, learning rate (STAEformer ), halved after 2 stagnant epochs |
| Batch, epochs, early stopping | 8 windows, epochs, patience 6 on validation RMSE |
| Sensor dropout | fraction of sensors hidden per sample |
| Loss | Huber ( ) on standardised anomalies; observed current cells weight 0.1 |
| Gradient clipping | 5 |
| Model | Parameters | Epochs | Train (min) | Inference (s/day) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ridge (interp. features) | – | – | 1 | – |
| GBDT (interp. features) | – | – | 3 | – |
| GRU (no graph) | 13,730 | 40 | 28 | 0.7 |
| DCRNN | 55,586 | 40 | 94 | 3.1 |
| GCRN | 62,114 | 40 | 94 | 3.3 |
| AGCRN | 252,536 | 40 | 82 | 2.5 |
Traffic Forecasting
Traffic forecasting predicts future flows, speeds, demand, travel times, and congestion from spatial, temporal, and contextual data.
See all 87 papers