Origin–destination synthesis for aviation network data: examining hub operations in the domestic and international US markets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Hub‐and‐spoke networking is a key feature of current aviation markets in which hubs, as connecting points, function to consolidate and redistribute flows. This indicates that observation of traffic on a segment does not necessarily convey information about the origin to destination routing of passenger journeys because of the unavoidable detours in the system. This paper examines the heterogeneity of the flow composition in domestic and international US markets, which in turn allows us to observe the variation of operations across major hubs. A modified Route Flow Estimator for origin–destination synthesis (or origin–destination matrix estimation) is designed to decompose the segment traffic into itinerary‐based passenger trips. Several public and commercial databases, which are easily accessible, are exploited (and reconciled) for the model in order to (i) generate possible trip itineraries using those segment markets, and (ii) link data‐driven operational conditions with the underlying segment flows. The results are validated with US domestic trip observations and empirical knowledge related to the air transportation system. Then, the variability of the hub operations is examined based on sensitivity tests using the model parameters. From the resolution of itinerary‐based estimates, we observe that major airports' hub operations are spatially uneven, particularly with respect to domestic and international connecting passengers. 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".