MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124997479 · doi:10.1002/atr.5670340204

Optimal feeder bus routes on irregular street networks

2000· article· en· W2124997479 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeadwayMathematical optimizationComputer scienceIntersection (aeronautics)Price elasticity of demandComputationTravel timeRouting (electronic design automation)AlgorithmSimulationTransport engineeringEngineeringMathematicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The methodology presented here seeks to optimize bus routes feeding a major intermodal transit transfer station while considering intersection delays and realistic street networks. A model is developed for finding the optimal bus route location and its operating headway in a heterogeneous service area. The criterion for optimality is the minimum total cost, including supplier and user costs. Irregular and discrete demand distributions, which realistically represent geographic variations in demand, are considered in the proposed model. The optimal headway is derived analytically for an irregularly shaped service area without demand elasticity, with non‐uniformly distributed demand density, and with a many‐to‐one travel pattern. Computer programs are designed to analyze numerical examples, which show that the combinatory type routing problem can be globally optimized. The improved computational efficiency of the near‐optimal algorithm is demonstrated through numerical comparisons to an optimal solution obtained by the exhaustive search (ES) algorithm. The CPU time spent by each algorithm is also compared to demonstrate that the near‐optimal algorithm converges to an acceptable solution significantly faster than the ES algorithm.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it