Minimizing the Health and Climate Impacts of Emissions from Heavy-Duty Public Transportation Bus Fleets through Operational Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In contrast to capital control strategies (i.e., investments in new technology), the potential of operational control strategies (e.g., vehicle scheduling optimization) to reduce the health and climate impacts of the emissions from public transportation bus fleets has not been widely considered. This case study demonstrates that heterogeneity in the emission levels of different bus technologies and the exposure potential of bus routes can be exploited though optimization (e.g., how vehicles are assigned to routes) to minimize these impacts as well as operating costs. The magnitude of the benefits of the optimization depend on the specific transit system and region. Health impacts were found to be particularly sensitive to different vehicle assignments and ranged from worst to best case assignment by more than a factor of 2, suggesting there is significant potential to reduce health impacts. Trade-offs between climate, health, and cost objectives were also found. Transit agencies that do not consider these objectives in an integrated framework and, for example, optimize for costs and/or climate impacts alone, risk inadvertently increasing health impacts by as much as 49%. Cost-benefit analysis was used to evaluate trade-offs between objectives, but large uncertainties make identifying an optimal solution challenging.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".