A bibliometric analysis of multi-source information fusion mechanisms in intelligent transportation big data: applications and efficiency perspectives

Abstract

The Multi-source Information Fusion (MSIF) mechanism and its applications involving big data in Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) represent a major research focus in current studies. This paper conducts a bibliometric analysis to summarize and evaluate developments in this domain. Initially, it categorizes the main application areas within ITS, then identifies the types and structures of data commonly involved, as well as frequently used datasets and evaluation metrics. It further explores specific MSIF applications in ITS, including road traffic management, traffic control, and transportation engineering computations. In particular, MSIF has demonstrated significant potential in enhancing transportation efficiency—such as reducing congestion, optimizing traffic signal coordination, and improving route planning—as well as improving energy efficiency by enabling eco-driving strategies and minimizing unnecessary fuel consumption. Based on the bibliometric findings, the study highlights current research challenges and key issues, while offering insights into future directions of MSIF development in intelligent transportation big data. This analysis aims to provide researchers and practitioners with a comprehensive overview and valuable guidance on the MSIF mechanism and its applications in ITS.

1 Introduction

According to the IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Society (http://sites.ieee.org/itss/), ITS can be described as systems that utilize “synergistic technologies and systems engineering concepts to develop and improve transportation systems of all kinds” (Cobo et al., 2014). ITS plays a crucial role in modern society, encompassing various technologies and applications like intelligent route recommendations, traffic safety evaluations, dynamic traffic light systems, and autonomous vehicles.

MSIF methodology involves combining data from various sensors to create more detailed and precise information than what can be obtained from a single source. The concept of “fusion,” referring to the integration of data from diverse sources, was first introduced in several publications during the late 1970s. Since then, theories and technologies related to MSIF have advanced rapidly, establishing itself as a distinct discipline. Today, MSIF is successfully applied in military command automation, environmental monitoring for disaster response, and healthcare data integration. Furthermore, MSIF is expanding into civilian domains such as ITS, remote sensing monitoring, medical diagnosis, electronic commerce, wireless communication, and fault diagnosis. This expansion demonstrates the growing significance and versatility of MSIF beyond its original military applications (Pan, 2013).

Multi-source information fusion (MSIF), an interdisciplinary area rooted in contemporary information technology, has attracted considerable scholarly attention and presents promising prospects for a wide array of applications. Advancements in hardware and related instruments across various areas of computing and engineering have significantly expanded the range of data available for assessing the functional state of targets. By integrating and analyzing information gathered from multiple homogeneous or heterogeneous sensors, MSIF has delivered substantial achievements in numerous military and civilian applications, offering more precise and reliable insights into situational awareness (Kashinath et al., 2021).

Over the past 50 years, significant progress has been made in both the theoretical and practical aspects of MSIF [see Table 1 (Bowman and Morefield, 1980; Berberian and King, 1981; Bai and Wang, 2016; Steinberg et al., 1999; Redman, 1998; Llinas, 2010; Zhang et al., 2019; Jia et al., 2020; Khan and Banerjee, 2008; Wei and Liang, 2019; Koch, 2021; Su et al., 2023; Jin et al., 2023)]. However, due to its extensive range of applications, there is currently no universal implementation framework for information fusion (IF). Both industry and academia generally discourage the use of a single, fixed IF framework for diverse applications. MSIF may adopt their own specific models and methods in different application fields, because the data characteristics, fusion objectives and application requirements in different fields are different. Therefore, there is no single model that can be applied to all fields (Kashinath et al., 2021; Li X. et al., 2023). On the contrary, researchers should choose or design appropriate IF models tailored to the unique requirements of specific application scenarios and the inherent characteristics of the data. In practical application, It is chosen and fine-tuned based on the unique characteristics of the data and the specific demands of the application. Therefore, the research of MSIF is often based on the customization of specific fields and specific problems, rather than simply applying a unified model.

Review papers aim to synthesize the current evidence on research questions while simultaneously fostering the formulation of empirically grounded recommendations for the research community (Kitchenham, 2004). This paper is organized in the following manner: In the second part, the previous research related to the MSIF mechanism of intelligent transportation big data and its application is considered. Part 3 describes the strategies that guide the methodology of this review. Next, Part 4 introduces the results and discussions based on the research questions. Then the research results are elaborated in part 5. Finally, part 6 presents the conclusions of this review.

2 Background studies

This section discusses the previous research and links the review papers with the application of MSIF technology in ITS. Obviously, there have been many systematic reviews covering most MSIF and ITS method domains. No reviews have specifically focused on MSIF techniques within the ITS domain, despite the growing trend of MSIF in nearly all other fields. To address this gap, the authors compiled six review papers and one mapping study to identify the necessary components for this review on MSIF technology in ITS. Table 2 lists the summary of the nominated study.

As shown in Table 2, the leading review study was conducted by Xu et al. (2019), which provides a comprehensive review of ITS, focusing specifically on a framework for multi-aspect analysis within the domain. This review examined 9,747 studies published between 1993 and 2017. Among these, the majority were sourced from four leading journals in the ITS field, while the remaining studies came from a prominent conference in the domain.

The review led to several key findings, one of the most significant being the identification of six prominent topics in the ITS field, including road traffic, traffic control, road vehicles, traffic engineering computing, Global Positioning System (GPS), and road safety. Additionally, the study explored how to discern research trends through the evolution of ITS themes. The review also found that the collaborative relationship among writers in the ITS domain and the shared academic interests of scientists in ITS could be shown by building two additional networks: the network of co-authors and the author co-keyword network.

The second review paper, authored by Li et al. (2010), reviewed 405 papers and articles issued in IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems (T-ITS) over a time period From 2000 to the end of 2009. The ten most-cited papers in the study primarily focused on tackling issues in ITS applications, including automatic lane identification, as well as the classification of vehicles, pedestrians, and obstacles. The main findings of this paper include the countries with the greatest contributions, the most productive and influential writers, and the most prolific and influential institutions. These findings partially correspond to our review study, as our paper concentrates on the MSIF mechanism for intelligent transportation big data and its applications. To identify the most effective MSIF techniques for the ITS domain, additional reviews of MSIF in ITS are necessary, as these techniques have gained traction across various fields. The next review, a mapping study by Cobo et al. (2014b), also investigates the conceptual framework of the ITS research domain. Like the previous studies, this work was conducted in 2014 and covers the period from 1992 to 2011. This study reviewed 2,045 primary studies using an automated approach to identify and illustrate underlying themes and their evolution over successive years. The results shows that the ITS research has been concentrated on six primary thematic domains: Vehicle and Road Tracking, Driver Behavior and Safety, Scenario Simulation, Traffic Flow and Traffic Management, Vehicle Control, and Vehicle Navigation. The paper also indicated that The ITS research domain is experiencing rapid development.

The next two review papers are focused on MSIF itself, written by Li X. et al. (2023) and Zhang et al. (2021) respectively. The former one was done in 2023, and provides a thorough and organized review of recent advancements in MSIF. As for the latter one, the paper solely focuses on a single sub-topic, such as the application of RST in MSIF. Their findings highlight the future challenges and research prospects of MSIF.

The last two review papers were selected to help the authors more effectively formulate relevant key research questions for the forthcoming review study.

The first review, conducted in 2021 by Kashinath et al. (2021), examines the use of DF methods in ITS to support traffic flow analysis (TFA) and solutions for predicting various traffic variables, such as driving behavior, travel time, speed, density, incidents, and traffic flow. It also reviews DF methods for real-time and multi-sensor (heterogeneous) TFA research. The final review paper (Xing et al., 2022) provides a review of the literature on Traffic status monitoring utilizing Multi-Source Data Fusion (MSDF) in Urban traffic networks. This research discusses the current application status, identifies potential research gaps, addresses ongoing challenges, and highlights emerging trends in the use of MSIF within ITS applications.

To summarize the background of previous studies, Table 3 provides a comparison of the findings from related works with this review paper. As shown in Table 3, the first three documents primarily focus on investigating and analyzing the research status and key application areas of ITS. However, they do not address the data types and associated DF methods that are necessary for processing within the ITS domain. As for the next two documents, the first one expounds the existing achievements and main application fields of MSIF, and the second one discusses the present situation and achievements of MSIF research based on a certain theory, but There is currently no research exploring the utilization of MSIF technique within the ITS domain. The last two documents study and analyze the application of MSIF technology in some specific fields of ITS, and provide a comprehensive view on the modeling and implementation of MSIF in related specific fields of ITS. However, none of them focused on the data types employed in ITS, the data types that need to be processed in different fields in ITS and related MSIF methods. In summary, this new review paper will address several previously unexplored findings.

3 Research methods

A well-structured review paper necessitates a clear methodology for identifying and assessing pertinent previous studies. Based on specific objectives, the design method outlined in Figure 1 was systematically followed to undertake this review research. This method was guided by existing methodologies of Khatibsyarbini et al. (2018) and Kitchenham et al. (2009).

FIGURE 1

As shown in Figure 1, the review protocol consists of four main phases: research questions, search strategy, study selection, and data synthesis and extraction (Khatibsyarbini et al., 2018; Kitchenham et al., 2009). During the initial phase, research questions were formulated based on insights from prior studies outlined in Section 2. A comprehensive set of seven research questions was established to thoroughly explore the observed findings. A search strategy was then implemented using targeted search terms and procedures. The results from this search were then carried forward to the study selection phase, where they were filtered using inclusion and exclusion criteria to identify relevant studies. Quality assessments were performed on the selected studies to ensure their suitability. The final phase involved synthesizing the data and extracting the primary studies for this review.

3.1 Research questions stage

This review aims to investigate and provide an in-depth analysis of the MSIF mechanism in intelligent transportation big data and its applications, focusing on the latest techniques for further investigation, with the ultimate goal of enhancing the current methods. At the same time, the authors intend to analyze the empirical validation techniques applied in the reviewed MSIF studies. Accordingly, four principal research questions, along with their corresponding justifications, were established and are summarized in Table 4.

All of these research questions are closely interconnected and are explored together to shape the objectives of the present review. The gaps and supplementary findings identified in Table 3, which this paper seeks to address, are examined through the research questions presented in Table 4. To enhance understanding, Table 5 presents a mapping of the identified and additional findings to the relevant research questions.

With regard to Table 5, every proposed question addresses the gaps identified in previous works. These questions, designed based on the identified gaps, also uncover additional findings that strengthens the contributions of this review. In summary, the key inquiries hold significant value, potentially benefiting future studies on the MSIF mechanism in intelligent transportation big data and its applications.

3.2 Search strategy stage

As the primary focus of this paper is to examine MSIF techniques within the ITS domain, relevant results from previous studies were used to identify significant works. The phrases “Multi-Source Information Fusion” and “Intelligent Transportation Systems” were commonly used by the writers in the majority of the search queries. Additionally, the search strings were closely aligned with the specific research questions. Table 6 illustrates the relationship between the search strings and their corresponding research questions.

As shown in Table 6, distinct search strings were developed for each research question. The authors identified specific terms commonly used to address each question, with several related terms associated with each one.

3.3 Study selection stage

As previously stated, producing an authoritative review article demands a careful and systematic approach. Accordingly, to select the key studies, all potential articles were subjected to a thorough selection process, consisting of two phases: inclusion and exclusion criteria, followed by a quality assessment. The steps of this process are illustrated in Figure 2.

FIGURE 2

As illustrated in Figure 2, the process of identifying key studies begins by applying both inclusion and exclusion criteria to the pool of candidate papers. The results from this phase are then subjected to a quality assessment, which ultimately determines the final selection of primary studies. Table 7 details the review’s inclusion and exclusion criteria, while Table 8 presents the quality assessment criteria.

Each study was evaluated for its relevance to the research questions by employing the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Afterward, a quality assessment was conducted to ensure that the selected studies were capable of answering at least two or three of the research questions. After the eligibility screening stage, a comprehensive study quality review was conducted to verify that the selected studies effectively addressed all pertinent research questions.

To assess the selected articles,the researchers devised four quality evaluation questions, as detailed in Table 8. Table 9 provides a summary of the quality evaluation findings. As a result, some papers were excluded during this phase. After completing the selection process, 47 studies were identified as capable of addressing all of the previously established research inquiries. The eligibility criteria were employed to ascertain whether each study fulfilled the requirements related to the research inquiries, while the quality evaluation confirmed that every selected study could sufficiently address between one and three of these inquiries.

4 Findings and discussion

This part of the paper outlines the findings corresponding to the research inquiries. It begins with an overview of the key studies, succeeded by dedicated subsections addressing each research inquiry.

4.1 Overview of key studies

For the comprehensive review, a total of 47 primary studies were selected. These included 38 journal articles, four conference papers, and five other types of articles. The studies were analyzed and discussed in relation to the previously outlined research inquiries. Figure 3 illustrates the distribution of the selected studies, while Table 9 offers comprehensive overviews of each study.

FIGURE 3

4.2 What are the data structures of different types of traffic data? (RQ1.1)

ITS have experienced rapid development in recent decades, driven by worldwide urban expansion and industrial progress. ITS incorporate a diverse range of innovations and functionalities, including automated traffic regulation and adaptive traffic signal coordination (Xu et al., 2019; Li et al., 2010). Consequently, a diverse range of data types has been extensively utilized within ITS. The data sources of ITS are diversified, and the data generated by different sensors and data sources are different in time, space and format, so DF is very important for efficient operation and decision optimization of transportation system. As the basis and prerequisite of DF, it is an important foundation to clarify the types and structures of data used in different research fields of ITS. Table 10 lists in detail the traffic data types and their data structures used in hot research fields in ITS.

As can be seen from Table 10, structured data, such as database table data, including traffic flow statistics and vehicle registration information, and semi-structured data, such as sensor data or non-structured data, such as video, images and textual data, are quite different in DF methods and technologies, so there are great research gaps and values in different ITS application fields.

4.3 What are the data sets and evaluation indicators used in ITS field? (RQ1.2)

In the research of ITS, data set and evaluation index are the cornerstones of evaluating model performance and popularizing application. High-quality data sets provide a wide range of application scenarios and diverse data sources. For example, public data sets provide a standard platform for different researchers to directly compare the performance of algorithms, which promotes academic progress. The reasonable evaluation index ensures the reliability, robustness and security of the system. Both of them complement each other and are important foundations for the research and development of ITS. Supplementary Appendix Table 1 in Appendix A lists the commonly used traffic data sets and evaluation indicators.

4.4 How about the application of MSIF in ITS? (RQ2.1)

The second inquiry in our study focuses on exploring the application of MSIF (Multi-Source Information Fusion) technology in ITS (Intelligent Transportation Systems). To address the first aspect of this question, the experimental setups and results from selected studies were thoroughly analyzed. For each MSIF technique, specific research works were chosen for detailed examination to give a glimpse on how these techniques are applied within the context of ITS. Table 11 summarizes the related results.

In the field of road traffic, by fusing different types of sensor data, the system can more accurately monitor traffic flow, detect congestion and predict future traffic trends. For instance, traffic accident detection using multi-source data is examined by integrating the MSDF model with data obtained from probe vehicles and microwave sensors (Liu et al., 2021).

In the field of traffic control, the integration of real-time traffic flow, vehicle detection and environmental data can dynamically optimize signal timing, reduce congestion and improve traffic efficiency. For instance, utilizing the simulated dynamic traffic assignment (DTA) model, a variant of the Hooke-Jeeves pattern search algorithm is employed to reduce discrepancies between the empirical network data and the model’s predictions (Huang et al., 2009).

In the field of road vehicles, laser radar, camera and radar DF can effectively make up for the limitations of a single sensor and enhance the accuracy and robustness of environmental perception. For example, multi-view feature multi-head self-attention fusion network is used to better extract and fuse multi-view image information, and realize the location of ultra-wide band (UWB) anchor without prior information (Hu et al., 2024).

In the field of traffic engineering calculation, MSDF makes the traffic simulation results more accurate, and then provides more scientific decision support for traffic management. For example, through a system Du-Bus based on MSDF, the real-time bus waiting time is estimated based on approaching the real-time position of the bus without GPS sensor (Rong et al., 2022).

In the field of global positioning system, by integrating GPS, inertial navigation system (INS) and map matching technology, the positioning accuracy of vehicles can be improved, especially in complex urban environment or tunnels, and the reliability of navigation system can be ensured. For example, a multi-source information fusion system based on decentralized system architecture and ground vehicle sequential Kalman filter is proposed, which can selectively and adaptively fuse information from odometer and motion assistance constraints in different driving environments (Mu and Zhao, 2023).

In the field of road safety, by integrating historical accident data, real-time traffic flow and weather conditions, accident-prone areas can be predicted and traffic control strategies can be adjusted in real time to reduce accident risks. For instance, a black spot identification algorithm based on a deep neural network has been proposed, where a deep neural network incorporating relevant data category information is constructed. The model’s capability to identify accident-prone black spots has been successfully validated (Fan et al., 2019).

In the field of object detection, vehicles, pedestrians and other traffic participants can be identified more accurately by fusing lidar, camera and radar data, and the accuracy of object detection and classification can be improved. For example, a new automatic program is proposed to detect small-scale objects in traffic sequences (García-Aguilar et al., 2023).

4.5 What are the differences of MSIF technology in different application fields of ITS? (RQ2.2)

The technical differences in MSDF across these research fields primarily involve the types of data sources, fusion algorithms, and application objectives. Each field tailors its fusion techniques based on specific needs and system requirements, leading to optimized decision-making and improved performance in intelligent transportation systems. Related technical features are shown in Table 12.

4.6 How to solve the problems of inaccuracy, incompleteness and noise in heterogeneous traffic DF? (RQ3)

In heterogeneous traffic DF, issues like inaccuracy, incompleteness, and noise can have significant negative impacts. Here’s a breakdown of the hazards and potential solutions.

4.6.1 Hazards of inaccurate, incomplete, and noisy data in traffic DF

4.6.1.1 Decision-making errors

Inaccurate and incomplete data can lead to incorrect traffic flow predictions, suboptimal route planning, or faulty traffic signal controls,etc. Noisy data can trigger false alerts, resulting in misinformed decisions and inefficient resource allocation (Xu Y. et al., 2023; Yi et al., 2003).

4.6.1.2 Degraded model performance

Machine learning models and algorithms rely on high-quality data. Inaccurate and noisy inputs degrade model accuracy, resulting in poor predictions, misclassifications, and potentially biased results (Wang L. et al., 2024; Duan, 2023).

4.6.1.3 Information conflicts and redundancy

Heterogeneous data from various sources can be inconsistent or redundant. Without effective handling, conflicts between datasets can reduce overall data reliability, leading to flawed fusion results (Xia et al., 2014).

4.6.1.4 Reduced system robustness and stability

Noisy data can cause the system to exhibit unpredictable behaviors, such as sudden traffic fluctuations or incorrect control actions, which negatively impact the stability and safety of the entire traffic system (Zhang et al., 2021; Zhang X. et al., 2022; Li et al., 2024; Li W. et al., 2023; Guo et al., 2020; Zhang P. et al., 2022).

4.6.1.5 Resource wastage

Erroneous or incomplete data can lead to poor utilization of infrastructure or resources, such as unnecessary traffic signal adjustments or inefficient road usage, causing overall inefficiency (Zhou et al., 2023; Xu W. et al., 2023; Wei and Liang, 2019; Chen and Xu, 2022; Li and Zhang, 2017).

In traffic DF, the accuracy, integrity and low noise of data are very important for the performance of ITS. The application scenarios of ITS include traffic monitoring, autonomous driving, real-time path planning, etc. These applications depend on the high-quality fusion of multi-source data, so the author actively discusses such research issues. The solution of MSDF in related research fields mainly involves data source types, fusion algorithms and application targets, and its fusion technology is customized according to specific needs and system requirements, thus ensuring the accuracy, integrity and robustness of traffic DF. By means of data cleaning, weighted fusion, denoising, multimodal fusion and real-time monitoring, intelligent transportation system can cope with the complex and dynamic real traffic environment, thus providing safer and more efficient traffic management and services. Figure 4 presents the specific procedure in detail.

FIGURE 4

4.6.2 Solutions for addressing data inaccuracy, incompleteness, and noise in traffic DF

4.6.2.1 Data cleaning and preprocessing

4.6.2.2 Weighted DF

Assign weights to different data sources based on their reliability and historical accuracy. Apply weighted averaging or Bayesian methods to fuse data, reducing the influence of noisy inputs.

4.6.2.3 Deep learning for denoising and correction

Leverage autoencoders, Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs), and other deep learning models to automatically detect, denoise, and correct errors in the data, leading to more accurate and reliable fusion.

4.6.2.4 Multimodal DF

Integrate data from various modalities (e.g., video, sensors, social media) using techniques like co-learning or cross-domain alignment, which helps fill gaps and improve overall data completeness and accuracy.

4.6.2.5 Real-time data quality surveillance and feedback

Implement real-time surveillance systems that constantly assess data quality, automatically filtering out inaccurate or noisy inputs. Dynamic feedback loops can adjust fusion strategies as data characteristics change.

4.6.2.6 Robust and adaptive algorithms

Design resilient algorithms capable of maintaining high performance in environments with noisy or partial data. Adaptive models that adjust to shifting data patterns can help minimize the negative effects of poor data quality.

4.7 What are the research status, progress and characteristics of MSIF based on RST in ITS? (RQ3.1)

Rough set theory (RST) shows the capability to handle unpredictable conditions, fuzziness and incomplete data in the research of MSIF (Zhang et al., 2021; Wei and Liang, 2019), so it shows great research potential in the research of MSIF in ITS. Below is an overview of the research status, progress, and characteristics of MSIF based on RST in ITS.

4.7.1 Research status of RST-Based MSIF in ITS

4.7.2 Research progress of RST-Based MSIF in ITS

4.7.3 Characteristics of RST-Based MSIF

4.8 What are the research progress, characteristics and challenges of MSIF in ITS? (RQ4)

The research of MSIF (multi-source information fusion) in ITS mainly focuses on how to synthesize multi-source and heterogeneous traffic data to improve the accuracy and efficiency of traffic monitoring, forecasting and management.

Below are the key aspects of the research progress, characteristics, and challenges of MSIF in ITS.

4.8.1 Research progress of MSIF in ITS

4.8.2 Characteristics of MSIF in ITS

4.8.3 Challenges of MSIF in ITS

5 Research findings

With the rise of MSIF in ITS field, It is crucial to grasp the present landscape of MSIF technology within ITS. The detailed technology of MSIF in ITS is very important for optimizing the related research results of ITS. Therefore, in order to highlight the influence of MSIF technology in ITS field, more emphasis must be placed on the discovery of each research problem.

For the first research question, the selected research reveals the diversity of data used in ITS, including source, type, structure and format, which may lead to great technical differences in the MSIF methods and technologies selected later, which will have an important impact on related application research and results, so the related fields have great research gaps and value. In addition, high-quality public data sets can provide a good foundation for related research, while reasonable evaluation indicators ensure the reliability, robustness and security of the system, providing a consistent evaluation standard for related research work.

For the subsequent research inquiry, the objective is to explore the differences in how MSIF technology is applied in the main ITS domains, and the conclusion is that the technical differences of MSIF in these research fields mainly involve data source types, fusion algorithms and application objectives. In addition to data source types, requirements and target requirements also have an important impact on the relevant fusion technologies adopted.

For the third research question, the research results show that in MSIF of traffic data, the accuracy, integrity and low noise of data are very important to the performance of ITS (Zhou et al., 2023; Xu W. et al., 2023; Wei and Liang, 2019; Chen and Xu, 2022; Li and Zhang, 2017). By means of data cleaning, weighted fusion, denoising, multimodal fusion and real-time monitoring, the problems of inaccuracy, incompleteness and noise in MSIF of heterogeneous traffic data can be effectively solved. In MSIF research, RST demonstrates its capacity to handle uncertainty, fuzziness, and incomplete data (Zhang et al., 2021; Wei and Liang, 2019), so it shows great research potential in the research of MSIF in ITS.

Regarding the final research question, our findings show that multimodal MSIF techniques (Zhao, 2024; Wang et al., 2016) and AI-based MSIF technologies—such as deep learning-based fusion methods (Bachmann et al., 2012) and real-time fusion systems (Huang et al., 2009; Rong et al., 2022)—are the primary approaches being explored. For the heterogeneity, high real-time, adaptability and robustness of traffic data, high requirements are put forward for related fusion technologies. In addition, data uncertainty and heterogeneity (Li et al., 2023a), balancing computational complexity and real-time performance (Rong et al., 2022), privacy and security issues (Bosi et al., 2019), standardized MSIF framework requirements (Wang X. et al., 2024; Huang et al., 2009)are all difficulties in future research.

6 Conclusion

This paper is the first literature review to systematically analyze the application of MSIF in ITS, which fills the gap in this field. In conclusion, the review objectives have been met by thoroughly addressing all the designated research questions. The findings, derived through a structured methodology of identifying, categorizing, and evaluating primary studies, aim to provide researchers with an overview of the current state of MSIF mechanism in intelligent transportation big data and its application. This insight is intended to facilitate further advancements in the field.

References

• 1

  AlDhanhaniA.DamianiE.MizouniR.WangD.Al-RubaieA. (2023). Multi-modal traffic event detection using shapelets. Neural comput. Appl.35, 1395–1408. 10.1007/s00521-022-07837-7

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 2

  BachmannC.AbdulhaiB.RoordaM. J.MoshiriB. (2012). Multisensor data integration and fusion in traffic operations and management. Transp. Res. Rec.2308, 27–36. 10.3141/2308-04

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 3

  BaiJ.WangJ. (2016). Improving malware detection using multi-view ensemble learning. Secur Commun. Netw.9 (17), 4227–4241. 10.1002/sec.1600

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 4

  BerberianM.KingG. (1981). Towards a paleogeography and tectonic evolution of Iran. Can. J. Earth Sci.18 (2), 210–265. 10.1139/e81-019

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 5

  BosiI.FerreraE.BreviD.PastroneC. (2019). “In-vehicle IoT platform enabling the virtual sensor concept: a pothole detection use-case for cooperative safety,” in Proc. 4th int. Conf. Internet of things, big data and security, heraklion, crete, Greece. 10.5220/0007690602320240

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 6

  BowmanC. L.MorefieldC. L. (1980). “Multisensor fusion of target attributes and kinematics,” in IEEE Conference on Decision and Control including the Symposium on Adaptive Processes, 837–839. 10.1109/cdc.1980.271921

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 7

  ChenX.XuW. (2022). Double-quantitative multigranulation rough fuzzy set based on logical operations in multi-source decision systems. Int. J. Mach. Learn. Cybern.13, 1021–1048. 10.1007/s13042-021-01433-2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 8

  ChenR.ZhaoL. (2024). Two-level integrity-monitoring method for multi-source information fusion navigation. Remote Sens.16, 120. 10.3390/rs16010120

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 9

  ChengX.ZhouJ.ZhaoX. (2020). Safety assessment of vehicle behaviour based on the improved D–S evidence theory. IET Intell. Transp. Syst.14, 1396–1402. 10.1049/iet-its.2019.0737

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 10

  CoboM. J.ChiclanaF.CollopA.de OnaJ.Herrera-ViedmaE. (2014). A bibliometric analysis of the intelligent transportation systems research based on science mapping. IEEE Trans. Intelligent Transp. Syst.15, 901–908. 10.1109/tits.2013.2284756

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 11

  DuanJ. (2023). Study on multi-heterogeneous sensor data fusion method based on millimeter-wave radar and camera. Sensors23, 6044. 10.3390/s23136044

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 12

  EkhlakovR.AndriyanovN. (2024). Multicriteria assessment method for network structure congestion based on traffic data using advanced computer vision. Mathematics12, 555. 10.3390/math12040555

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 13

  FanZ.LiuC.CaiD.YueS. (2019). Research on black spot identification of safety in urban traffic accidents based on machine learning method. Saf. Sci.118, 607–616. 10.1016/j.ssci.2019.05.039

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 14

  García-AguilarI.García-GonzálezJ.Luque-BaenaR. M.López-RubioE. (2023). Automated labeling of training data for improved object detection in traffic videos by fine-tuned deep convolutional neural networks. Pattern Recognit. Lett.167, 45–52. 10.1016/j.patrec.2023.01.015

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 15

  GuoY.TsangE. C. C.XuW.ChenD. (2020). Adaptive weighted generalized multi-granulation interval-valued decision-theoretic rough sets. Knowl. Based Syst.187, 104804. 10.1016/j.knosys.2019.06.012

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 16

  HuY.LiX.KongD.WeiK.NiP.HuJ. (2024). A reliable position estimation methodology based on multi-source information for intelligent vehicles in unknown environment. IEEE Trans. Intell. Veh.9 (1), 1667–1680. 10.1109/TIV.2023.3332860

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 17

  HuangE.AntoniouC.WenY.Ben-AkivaM.LopesJ.BentoJ. (2009). “Real-time multi-sensor multi-source network data fusion using dynamic traffic assignment models,” in Proc. 12th int. IEEE conf. Intell. Transp. syst. (St. Louis, MO, USA). 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2933319

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 18

  JiaC.GaoH.ChenN.HeY. (2020). Machine learning empowered beam management for intelligent reflecting surface assisted MmWave networks. China Commun.17 (10), 100–114. 10.23919/jcc.2020.10.007

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 19

  JinQ.LinR.YangF.ChangY. L. (2022). Detecting and recognizing driver distraction through various data modality using machine learning: a review, recent advances, simplified framework and open challenges (2014–2021). Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell.115, 105309. 10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105309

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 20

  JinJ.ZhouW.YangR.YeL.YuL. (2023). Edge detection guide network for semantic segmentation of remote-sensing images. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett.20, 1–5. 10.1109/lgrs.2023.3234257

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 21

  KashinathS. A.MostafaS. A.MustaphaA.MahdinH.LimD.MahmoudM. A.et al (2021). Review of data fusion methods for real-time and multi-sensor traffic flow analysis. IEEE Access9, 51258–51276. 10.1109/access.2021.3069770

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 22

  KhanM. A.BanerjeeM. (2008). Formal reasoning with rough sets in multiple‐source approximation systems. Intern. J. Approx. Reason.49 (2), 466–477. 10.1016/j.ijar.2008.04.005

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 23

  KhatibsyarbiniM.IsaM. A.JawawiD. N. A.TumengR. (2018). Test case prioritization approaches in regression testing: a systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol.93, 74–93. 10.1016/j.infsof.2017.08.014

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 24

  KitchenhamB.BreretonO. P.BudgenD.TurnerM.BaileyJ.LinkmanS. (2009). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering—a systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol.51 (1), 7–15. 10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 25

  KitchenhamB. A. (2004). “Procedures for performing systematic reviews,” Software Engineering Group, Keele, UK: Keele University, Tech. Rep. TR/SE-0401

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 26

  KochW. (2021). On digital ethics for artificial intelligence and information fusion in the defense domain. IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag.36 (7), 94–111. 10.1109/maes.2021.3066841

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 27

  LiM.ZhangX. (2017). Information fusion in a multi-source incomplete information system based on information entropy. Entropy19, 570. 10.3390/e19110570

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 28

  LiL.LiX.LiZ.ZengD. D.SchererW. T. (2010). A bibliographic analysis of the IEEE Transactions on intelligent transportation systems literature. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst.11, 251–255. 10.1109/tits.2010.2049890

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 29

  LiW.DuanF.XuC. (2019). Design and performance evaluation of a simple semi-physical human-vehicle collaborative driving simulation system. IEEE Access7, 31971–31983. 10.1109/access.2019.2903305

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 30

  LiX.DunkinF.DezertJ. (2023a). Multi-source information fusion: progress and future. Chin. J. Aeronautics37, 24–58. 10.1016/j.cja.2023.12.009

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 31

  LiW.ZhangC.CuiY.ShiJ. (2023b). A collaborative multi-granularity architecture for multi-source IoT sensor data in air quality evaluations. Electronics12, 2380. 10.3390/electronics12112380

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 32

  LiZ.ZhangQ.LiuS.PengY.LiL. (2024). Information fusion and attribute reduction for multi-source incomplete mixed data via conditional information entropy and D-S evidence theory. Appl. Soft Comput. J.151, 111149. 10.1016/j.asoc.2023.111149

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 33

  LiuJ.SunR.YuH. (2018). “Road speed fusion model based on wavelet neural network optimized by genetic algorithm,” in 2018 IEEE SmartWorld, ubiquitous intelligence and computing, advanced and trusted computing, scalable computing and communications, cloud and big data computing, internet of people and smart city innovations, 1293–1298. 10.1109/SmartWorld.2018.00225

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 34

  LiuJ.HuangJ.SunR.YuH.XiaoR. (2021). Data fusion for multi-source sensors using GA-PSO-BP neural network. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst.22 (10), 6583–6598. 10.1109/TITS.2020.3010296

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 35

  LlinasJ. (2010). “A survey and analysis of frameworks and framework issues for information fusion applications,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Hybrid artificial intelligence systems (Berlin, Germany: Springer), 14–23.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 36

  MuM.ZhaoL. (2023). Improved decentralized GNSS/SINS/odometer fusion system for land vehicle navigation applications. Meas. Sci. Technol.34, 035117. 10.1088/1361-6501/aca992

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 37

  PanQ. (2013). Multi-source information fusion theory and its applications. Beijing, China: Tsinghua University Press.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 38

  PedersenK. F.TorpK. (2021). “Geolocating traffic signs using large imagery datasets,” in Proc. 17th int. Symp. Spatial and temporal databases (USA: virtual). 10.1145/3469830.3470900

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 39

  RedmanT. C. (1998). The impact of poor data quality on the typical enterprise. Commun. ACM41 (2), 79–82. 10.1145/269012.269025

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 40

  RongX.XuZ.LiuJ.LiuH.DingJ.LiuX.et al (2022). Du-bus: a realtime bus waiting time estimation system based on multi-source data. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst.23 (12), 24524–24539. 10.1109/TITS.2022.3210170

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 41

  SaadiI.FarooqB.MustafaA.TellerJ.CoolsM. (2018). An efficient hierarchical model for multi-source information fusion. Expert Syst. Appl.110, 352–362. 10.1016/j.eswa.2018.06.018

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 42

  SteinbergA. N.BowmanC. L.WhiteF. E. (1999). “Revisions to the JDL data fusion model,” in Sensor Fusion: 549 Architectures, Algorithms, and Applications III, 3719, 430–441. 10.1117/12.341367

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 43

  SuZ.JiH.TianC.ZhangY. (2023). A robust Poisson multi-Bernoulli filter for multi-target tracking based on arithmetic average fusion. Chin. J. Aeronaut.36 (2), 179–190. 10.1016/j.cja.2022.04.008

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 44

  TkachenkoP.CertadN.SingerG.Olaverri-MonrealC.Del ReL. (2022). The JKU DORA traffic dataset. IEEE Access10, 92673–92680. 10.1109/access.2022.3203188

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 45

  VanajakshiL.RilettL. R. (2007). “Support vector machine technique for the short term prediction of travel time,” in 2007 IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium, istanbul, Turkey. 10.1109/ivs.2007.4290181

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 46

  VareskoL.OreskiG. (2023). “Performance comparison of novel object detection models on traffic data,” in Proc. 2023 8th int. Conf. Machine learning technologies (Stockholm, Sweden). 10.1145/3589883.3589910

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 47

  VlahogianniE. I.KarlaftisM. G.GoliasJ. C. (2005). Optimized and meta-optimized neural networks for short-term traffic flow prediction: a genetic approach. Transp. Res. Part C. Emerg. Technol.13 (3), 211–234. 10.1016/j.trc.2005.04.007

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 48

  WangX.-Q.ShaoC.-F.XunJ.LiuZ.-J.YuanY. (2016). “Research on multi-source traffic flow data fusion based on linear regression: a case study in mega-city,” in Proc. 2nd annu. Int. Conf. Adv. Mater. Eng. (AME 2016) (Wuhan, China). 10.2991/ame-16.2016.210

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 49

  WangP.HaoW.JinY. (2021). Fine-grained traffic flow prediction of various vehicle types via fusion of multisource data and deep learning approaches. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst.22, 6921–6930. 10.1109/tits.2020.2997412

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 50

  WangX.LiuJ.LinH.GargS.AlrashoudM. (2024a). A multi-modal spatial–temporal model for accurate motion forecasting with visual fusion. Inf. Fusion102, 102046. 10.1016/j.inffus.2023.102046

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 51

  WangL.LanJ.LiM. (2024b). AFRNet: anchor-free object detection using roadside LiDAR in urban scenes. Remote Sens.16, 782. 10.3390/rs16050782

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 52

  WeiW.LiangJ. (2019). Information fusion in rough set theory: an overview. Inf. Fusion48, 107–118. 10.1016/j.inffus.2018.08.007

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 53

  XiaY.ZhangT.WangS. (2014). A generic methodological framework for cyber-ITS: using cyber-infrastructure in ITS data analysis cases. Fundam. Inf.133, 35–53. 10.3233/fi-2014-1061

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 54

  XingJ.WuW.ChengQ.LiuR. (2022). Traffic state estimation of urban road networks by multi-source data fusion: review and new insights. Phys. A595, 127079. 10.1016/j.physa.2022.127079

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 55

  XuX.LiuY.WangW.ZhaoX.ShengQ. Z.WangZ.et al (2019). ITS-frame: a framework for multi-aspect analysis in the field of intelligent transportation systems. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst.20, 2893–2902. 10.1109/tits.2018.2868840

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 56

  XuZ.ZhaoS.ZhangR. (2021). An efficient multi‐sensor fusion and tracking protocol in a vehicle‐road collaborative system. IET Commun.15, 2330–2341. 10.1049/cmu2.12273

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 57

  XuY.LyuY.XiongG.WangS.WuW.CuiH.et al (2023a). Adaptive feature fusion networks for origin-destination passenger flow prediction in metro systems. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst.24 (5), 5296–5312. 10.1109/TITS.2023.3239101

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 58

  XuW.PanY.ChenX.DingW.QianY. (2023b). A novel dynamic fusion approach using information entropy for interval-valued ordered datasets. IEEE Trans. Big Data9, 845–859. 10.1109/tbdata.2022.3215494

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 59

  YiP.LuH.ZhangY. (2003). Rough sets and probability masses for Dempster-Shafer data fusion at a traffic management center. Transp. Res. Rec.1836, 151–156. 10.3141/1836-19

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 60

  YuanH.LiG. (2021). A survey of traffic prediction: from spatio-temporal data to intelligent transportation. Data Sci. Eng.6, 63–85. 10.1007/s41019-020-00151-z

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 61

  ZhangN.XuG.ZhangZ.LiF. (2019). MIFM: multi-granularity information fusion model for Chinese named entity recognition. IEEE Access7, 181648–181655. 10.1109/access.2019.2958959

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 62

  ZhangP.LiT.WangG.LuoC.ChenH.ZhangJ.et al (2021). Multi-source information fusion based on rough set theory: a review. Inf. Fusion68, 85–117. 10.1016/j.inffus.2020.11.004

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 63

  ZhangX.ChenX.XuW.DingW. (2022a). Dynamic information fusion in multi-source incomplete interval-valued information system with variation of information sources and attributes. Inf. Sci.608, 1–27. 10.1016/j.ins.2022.06.054

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 64

  ZhangP.LiT.YuanZ.LuoC.WangG.LiuJ.et al (2022b). A data-level fusion model for unsupervised attribute selection in multi-source homogeneous data. Inf. Fusion80, 87–103. 10.1016/j.inffus.2021.10.017

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 65

  ZhaoY. (2024). A novel truncated normal tensor completion method for multi-source fusion data. Mathematics12, 223. 10.3390/math12020223

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 66

  ZhouY.ShuX.BaoT.LiY.ZhangK. (2023). Dam safety assessment through data-level anomaly detection and information fusion. Struct. Health Monit.22, 2002–2021. 10.1177/14759217221117478

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article