Abstract: Predicting traffic incident duration is a major challenge for many traffic centres around the world. Most research studies focus on predicting the incident duration on motorways rather than arterial roads, due to a high network complexity and lack of data. In this paper we propose a bi-level framework for predicting the accident duration on arterial road networks in Sydney, based on operational requirements of incident clearance target which is less than 45 minutes. Using incident baseline information, we first deploy a classification method using various ensemble tree models in order to predict whether a new incident will be cleared in less than 45min or not. If the incident was classified as short-term, then various regression models are developed for predicting the actual incident duration in minutes by incorporating various traffic flow features. After outlier removal and intensive model hyper-parameter tuning through randomized search and cross-validation, we show that the extreme gradient boost approach outperformed all models, including the gradient-boosted decision-trees by almost 53%. Finally, we perform a feature importance evaluation for incident duration prediction and show that the best prediction results are obtained when leveraging the real-time traffic flow in vicinity road sections to the reported accident location. Initial methods used to predict the incident duration were 1. Introduction Bayesian classifiers [5], discrete choice models (DCM) [6], probabilistic distribution analyses [7], and the hazard-based Traffic congestion is a major concern for many cities duration models (HBDM) [8].

The causes underlying unfair decision making are complex, being internalised in different ways by decision makers, other actors dealing with data and models, and ultimately by the individuals being affected by these decisions. One frequent manifestation of all these latent causes arises in the form of missing values: protected groups are more reluctant to give information that could be used against them, delicate information for some groups can be erased by human operators, or data acquisition may simply be less complete and systematic for minority groups. As a result, missing values and bias in data are two phenomena that are tightly coupled. However, most recent techniques, libraries and experimental results dealing with fairness in machine learning have simply ignored missing data. In this paper, we claim that fairness research should not miss the opportunity to deal properly with missing data. To support this claim, (1) we analyse the sources of missing data and bias, and we map the common causes, (2) we find that rows containing missing values are usually fairer than the rest, which should not be treated as the uncomfortable ugly data that different techniques and libraries get rid of at the first occasion, and (3) we study the trade-off between performance and fairness when the rows with missing values are used (either because the technique deals with them directly or by imputation methods). We end the paper with a series of recommended procedures about what to do with missing data when aiming for fair decision making.

Mining temporal assertions from time-series data using information theory to filter real properties from incidental ones is a practically significant challenge. The problem is complex for continuous or hybrid systems because the degrees of influence on a consequent from a timed-sequence of predicates (called its prefix sequence), varies continuously over dense time intervals. We propose a parameterized method that uses interval arithmetic for flexibly learning prefix sequences having influence on a defined consequent over various time scales and predicates over system variables.

Predictive models are being increasingly used to support consequential decision making at the individual level in contexts such as pretrial bail and loan approval. As a result, there is increasing social and legal pressure to provide explanations that help the affected individuals not only to understand why a prediction was output, but also how to act to obtain a desired outcome. To this end, several works have proposed methods to generate counterfactual explanations. However, they are often restricted to a particular subset of models (e.g., decision trees or linear models), and cannot directly handle the mixed (numerical and nominal) nature of the features describing each individual. In this paper, we propose a model-agnostic algorithm to generate counterfactual explanations that builds on the standard theory and tools from formal verification. Specifically, our algorithm solves a sequence of satisfiability problems, where a wide variety of predictive models and distances in mixed feature spaces, as well as natural notions of plausibility and diversity, are represented as logic formulas. Our experiments on real-world data demonstrate that our approach can flexibly handle widely deployed predictive models, while providing meaningfully closer counterfactuals than existing approaches.

Performance estimation aims at estimating the loss that a predictive model will incur on unseen data. These procedures are part of the pipeline in every machine learning project and are used for assessing the overall generalisation ability of predictive models. In this paper we address the application of these methods to time series forecasting tasks. For independent and identically distributed data the most common approach is cross-validation. However, the dependency among observations in time series raises some caveats about the most appropriate way to estimate performance in this type of data and currently there is no settled way to do so. We compare different variants of cross-validation and of out-of-sample approaches using two case studies: One with 62 real-world time series and another with three synthetic time series. Results show noticeable differences in the performance estimation methods in the two scenarios. In particular, empirical experiments suggest that cross-validation approaches can be applied to stationary time series. However, in real-world scenarios, when different sources of non-stationary variation are at play, the most accurate estimates are produced by out-of-sample methods that preserve the temporal order of observations.

This text discusses several popular explanatory methods that go beyond the error measurements and plots traditionally used to assess machine learning models. Some of the explanatory methods are accepted tools of the trade while others are rigorously derived and backed by long-standing theory. The methods, decision tree surrogate models, individual conditional expectation (ICE) plots, local interpretable model-agnostic explanations (LIME), partial dependence plots, and Shapley explanations, vary in terms of scope, fidelity, and suitable application domain. Along with descriptions of these methods, this text presents real-world usage recommendations supported by a use case and public, in-depth software examples for reproducibility.

We propose an algorithm named best-scored random forest for binary classification problems. The terminology "best-scored" means to select the one with the best empirical performance out of a certain number of purely random tree candidates as each single tree in the forest. In this way, the resulting forest can be more accurate than the original purely random forest. From the theoretical perspective, within the framework of regularized empirical risk minimization penalized on the number of splits, we establish almost optimal convergence rates for the proposed best-scored random trees under certain conditions which can be extended to the best-scored random forest. In addition, we present a counterexample to illustrate that in order to ensure the consistency of the forest, every dimension must have the chance to be split. In the numerical experiments, for the sake of efficiency, we employ an adaptive random splitting criterion. Comparative experiments with other state-of-art classification methods demonstrate the accuracy of our best-scored random forest.

A decision tree is a supervised machine learning model used to predict a target by learning decision rules from features. As the name suggests, we can think of this model as breaking down our data by making a decision based on asking a series of questions. Let's consider the following example in which we use a decision tree to decide upon an activity on a particular day: Based on the features in our training set, the decision tree model learns a series of questions to infer the class labels of the samples. As we can see, decision trees are attractive models if we care about interpretability. Although the preceding figure illustrates the concept of a decision tree based on categorical targets (classification), the same concept applies if our targets are real numbers (regression).

Random forests remain among the most popular off-the-shelf supervised learning algorithms. Despite their well-documented empirical success, however, until recently, few theoretical results were available to describe their performance and behavior. In this work we push beyond recent work on consistency and asymptotic normality by establishing rates of convergence for random forests and other supervised learning ensembles. We develop the notion of generalized U-statistics and show that within this framework, random forest predictions remain asymptotically normal for larger subsample sizes than previously established. We also provide Berry-Esseen bounds in order to quantify the rate at which this convergence occurs, making explicit the roles of the subsample size and the number of trees in determining the distribution of random forest predictions.

By seeking the narrowest prediction intervals (PIs) that satisfy the specified coverage probability requirements, the recently proposed quality-based PI learning principle can extract high-quality PIs that better summarize the predictive certainty in regression tasks, and has been widely applied to solve many practical problems. Currently, the state-of-the-art quality-based PI estimation methods are based on deep neural networks or linear models. In this paper, we propose Highest Density Interval Regression Forest (HDI-Forest), a novel quality-based PI estimation method that is instead based on Random Forest. HDI-Forest does not require additional model training, and directly reuses the trees learned in a standard Random Forest model. By utilizing the special properties of Random Forest, HDI-Forest could efficiently and more directly optimize the PI quality metrics. Extensive experiments on benchmark datasets show that HDI-Forest significantly outperforms previous approaches, reducing the average PI width by over 30\% while achieving the same or better coverage probability.