MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143138030 · doi:10.1002/atr.1331

Welfare maximization for bus transit systems with timed transfers and financial constraints

2015· article· en· W2143138030 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Linxi Chen, Paul Schonfeld, Elise Miller‐Hooks

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad del AtlánticoMorgan State UniversityPennsylvania State University
KeywordsPrice elasticity of demandSubsidyBounded functionMaximizationMathematical optimizationWelfareService (business)Computer scienceTransfer (computing)Elasticity (physics)Economic surplusGenetic algorithmPublic transportService levelOperations researchEconomicsMicroeconomicsBusinessTransport engineeringEngineeringMathematicsEconomyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Conventional and flexible bus services may be combined to better serve regions with a wide range of characteristics. If demand densities and resulting service frequencies are low, the coordination of bus arrivals at transfer stations may significantly reduce passenger transfer times. A method is proposed for integrating, coordinating, and optimizing bus services while considering many‐to‐many travel patterns, demand elasticity, financial constraints, and appropriate service type for various regions. The objective is to maximize welfare, that is, the sum of producer and consumer surplus. The problem is solved with a hybrid optimization method, in which a genetic algorithm with bounded integer variables is selected for solving one of the subproblems. The service types, fares, headways, and service zone sizes are jointly optimized. Sensitivity analyses explore how the choice among conventional and flexible busses depends on the demand, subsidy, and demand elasticity parameters. The results also show that welfare can increase due to coordination, and these increases are found to be higher in cases with high demand or low subsidy. 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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207