MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2530791898 · doi:10.1109/tits.2016.2586938

A Cognitive Control Method for Cost-Efficient CBTC Systems With Smart Grids

2016· article· en· W2530791898 on OpenAlexafffund
Wenzhe Sun, F. Richard Yu, Tao Tang, Siqing You

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Systems and Energy Efficiency
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Beijing MunicipalityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTrainComputer scienceEngineeringTraction power networkWirelessAutomotive engineeringSimulationPower (physics)Telecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Communication-based train control (CBTC) systems use wireless local area networks for information transmission between trains and wayside equipment. Since inevitable packet delay and drop are introduced in train-wayside communications, information uncertainties in trains' states will lead to unplanned traction/braking demands, as well as waste in electrical energy. Moreover, with the introduction of regenerative braking technology, power grids in CBTC systems are evolving to smart grids, and cost-aware power management should be employed to reduce the total financial cost of consumed electrical energy. In this paper, a cognitive control method for CBTC systems with smart grids is presented to enhance both train operation performance and cost efficiency. We formulate a cognitive control system model for CBTC systems. The information gap in cognitive control is calculated to analyze how the train-wayside communications affect the operation of trains. The Q-learning algorithm is used in the proposed cognitive control method, and a joint objective function composed of the information gap and the total financial cost is a.pplied to generate optimal policy. The medium-access control layer retry-limit adaption and traction strategy selection are adopted as cognitive actions. Extensive simulation results show that the cost efficiency and train operation performance of CBTC systems are substantially improved using our proposed cognitive control method.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation SystemsSame topicRailway Systems and Energy EfficiencyFrench-language works237,207