Optimization of bus allocation to depots by minimizing dead kilometers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary In metropolitan cities, public transportation service plays a vital role in mobility of people, and it has to introduce new routes more frequently due to the fast development of the city in terms of population growth and city size. Whenever there is introduction of new route or increase in frequency of buses, the non‐revenue kilometers covered by the buses increases as depot and route starting/ending points are at different places. This non‐revenue kilometers or dead kilometers depends on the distance between depot and route starting point/ending point. The dead kilometers not only results in revenue loss but also results in an increase in the operating cost because of the extra kilometers covered by buses. Reduction of dead kilometers is necessary for the economic growth of the public transportation system. Therefore, in this study, the attention is focused on minimizing dead kilometers by optimizing allocation of buses to depots depending upon the shortest distance between depot and route starting/ending points. We consider also depot capacity and time period of operation during allocation of buses to ensure parking safety and proper maintenance of buses. Mathematical model is developed considering the aforementioned parameters, which is a mixed integer program, and applied to Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC) routes operating presently in order to obtain optimal bus allocation to depots. Database for dead kilometers of depots in BMTC for all the schedules are generated using the Form‐4 (trip sheet) of each schedule to analyze depot‐wise and division‐wise dead kilometers. This study also suggests alternative locations where depots can be located to reduce dead kilometers. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".