MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2253813636 · doi:10.1002/atr.1365

Distributed algorithm for empty vehicles management in personal rapid transit (PRT) network

2016· article· en· W2253813636 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Regional Development Fund
KeywordsSet (abstract data type)HeuristicFunction (biology)Space (punctuation)Transit (satellite)Feature (linguistics)Distributed managementDistributed algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary In this paper, an original heuristic algorithm of empty vehicles management in personal rapid transit network is presented. The algorithm is used for the delivery of empty vehicles for waiting passengers, for balancing the distribution of empty vehicles within the network, and for providing an empty space for vehicles approaching a station. Each of these tasks involves a decision on the trip that has to be done by a selected empty vehicle from its actual location to some determined destination. The decisions are based on a multi‐parameter function involving a set of factors and thresholds. An important feature of the algorithm is that it does not use any central database of passenger input (demand) and locations of free vehicles. Instead, it is based on the local exchange of data between stations: on their states and on the vehicles they expect. Therefore, it seems well‐tailored for a distributed implementation. The algorithm is uniform, meaning that the same basic procedure is used for multiple tasks using a task‐specific set of parameters. Copyright © 2016 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207