MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604257928 · doi:10.1002/atr.1460

Optimizing coordinated transfer with probabilistic vehicle arrivals and passengers' walking time

2016· article· en· W2604257928 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mei Xiao, Steven Chien, Dawei Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransfer (computing)Probabilistic logicSynchronizingTransfer stationTransport engineeringComputer scienceArrival timeReservationTravel timeOperations researchEngineeringTelecommunicationsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Supporting efficient connections by synchronizing vehicle arrival time and passengers' walking time at a transfer hub may significantly improve service quality, stimulate demand, and increase productivity. However, vehicle travel times and walking times in urban settings often varies spatially and temporally due to a variety of factors. Nevertheless, the reservation of slack time and/or the justification of vehicle arrival time at the hub may substantially increase the success of transfer coordination. To this end, this paper develops a model that considers probabilistic vehicle arrivals and passengers walking speeds so that the slack time and the scheduled bus arrival time can be optimized by minimizing the total system cost. A case study is conducted in which the developed model is applied to optimize the coordination of multiple bus routes connecting at a transfer station in Xi'an, China. The relationship between decision variables and model parameters, including the mean and the standard deviation of walking time, is explored. It was found that the joint impact of probabilistic vehicle arrivals and passengers' walking time significantly affects the efficiency of coordinated transfer. The established methodology can essentially be applied to any distribution of bus arrival and passenger walking time. Copyright © 2017 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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