Investigating the Potential of Ridesharing to Reduce Vehicle Emissions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As urban populations grow, cities need new strategies to maintain a good standard of living while enhancing services and infrastructure development. A key area for improving city operations and spatial layout is the transportation of people and goods. While conventional transportation systems (i.e., fossil fuel based) are struggling to serve mobility needs for growing populations, they also represent serious environmental threats. Alternative-fuel vehicles can reduce emissions that contribute to local air pollution and greenhouse gases as mobility needs grow. However, even if alternative-powered vehicles were widely employed, road congestion would still increase. This paper investigates ridesharing as a mobility option to reduce emissions (carbon, particulates and ozone) while accommodating growing transportation needs and reducing overall congestion. The potential of ridesharing to reduce carbon emissions from personal vehicles in Changsha, China, is examined by reviewing mobility patterns of approximately 8,900 privately-owned vehicles over two months. Big data analytics identify ridesharing potential among these drivers by grouping vehicles by their trajectory similarity. The approach includes five steps: data preprocessing, trip recognition, feature vector creation, similarity measurement and clustering. Potential reductions in vehicle emissions through ridesharing among a specific group of drivers are calculated and discussed. While the quantitative results of this analysis are specific to the population of Changsha, they provide useful insights for the potential of ridesharing to reduce vehicle emissions and the congestion expected to grow with mobility needs. Within the study area, ridesharing has the potential to reduce total kilometers driven by about 24% assuming a maximum distance between trips less than 10 kilometers, and schedule time less than 60 minutes. For a more conservative maximum trip distance of 2 kilometers and passenger schedule time of less than 40 minutes, the reductions in traveled kilometers could translate to the equivalent of approximately 4.0 tons CO2 emission reductions daily.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".