MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606152668 · doi:10.1155/2017/8512728

Dealing with the Empty Vehicle Movements in Personal Rapid Transit System with Batteries Constraints in a Dynamic Context

2017· article· en· W2606152668 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ezzeddine Fatnassi, Olfa Chebbi, Jouhaina Chaouachi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransit (satellite)Context (archaeology)Personal mobilityBenchmark (surveying)Transit systemPublic transportSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceSimulationPersonal computerTransport engineeringOperations researchEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Personal Rapid Transit is a new emergent transportation tool. It relies on using a set of small driverless electric vehicles to transport people on demand. Because of the specific on-demand characteristic of the Personal Rapid Transit system, many Personal Rapid Transit vehicles would move empty which results in a high level of wasted transportation capacity. This is enhanced while using Personal Rapid Transit vehicles with limited electric battery capacity. This paper deals with this problem in a real time context while minimizing the set of empty vehicle movements. First, a mathematical formulation to benchmark waiting time of passengers in Personal Rapid Transit systems is proposed. Then, a simulation model that captures the main features of the Personal Rapid Transit system is developed. A decision support system which integrates several real time solution strategies as well as a simulation module is proposed. Our dispatching strategies are evaluated and compared based on our simulation model. The efficiency of our method is tested through extensive test studies.

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 score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations13
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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