MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804345352 · doi:10.1155/2018/5493632

Locating Station of One-Way Carsharing Based on Spatial Demand Characteristics

2018· article· en· W2804345352 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiaqi Cheng, Yong Jin, Xi Li, Fei Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAlgorithmComputer scienceStatisticsDatabaseMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to explore factors that affect carsharing demand characteristics in different time periods based on EVCARD transaction data, which is the largest station-based one-way carsharing program in Shanghai, China. Monthly usage intensity and degree of usage imbalance are used as proxies of demand. This study uses three groups of independent variables: carsharing station attributes, built environment (density, diversity, design, and destination accessibility), and transportation facilities. The adaptive elastic net regression is developed to identify factors that influence carsharing usage intensity and degree of usage imbalance after factor selection using extra-randomized-tree algorithm. Finally, a station layout is proposed according to both usage intensity and degree of imbalance. The main results of this study are presented as follows: (1) different effects of built environment and transportation factors cause dynamic demand across different time periods; (2) factors with positive and negative effect on carsharing demand are divided clearly for guidance of the carsharing station layout; (3) public parking space leads to more personal vehicle trip compared to a carsharing trip; and (4) as public transportation, the relationship of the metro and carsharing is complementary. However, the bus stop and carsharing have a competitive relationship. This study provides a carsharing layout method based on both usage intensity and degree of imbalance. Furthermore, several policies concerning carsharing are proposed.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations29
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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