Optimizing the Location of Virtual Stations in Free-Floating Bike-Sharing Systems with the User Demand during Morning and Evening Rush Hours
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, free-floating bike-sharing systems (FFBSSs) have been considerably developed in China. As there is no requirement to construct bike stations, this system can substantially reduce the cost when compared to the traditional bike-sharing systems. However, FFBSSs have also become a critical cause of parking disorder, especially during the morning and evening rush hours. To address this issue, the local governments stipulated that FFBSSs are required to deploy virtual stations near public transit stations and major establishments. Therefore, the location assignment of virtual stations is sufficiently considered in the FFBSSs, which is required to solve the parking disorder and satisfy the user demand, simultaneously. The purpose of this study is to optimize the location assignment of virtual stations that can meet the growing demand of users by analyzing the usage data of their shared bikes. This optimization problem is generally formulated as a mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) model to maximize the user demand. As an alternative solution, this article proposes a clustering algorithm, which can solve this problem in real time. The experimental results demonstrate that the MILP model and the proposed method are superior to the K-means method. Our method not only provides a solution for maximizing the user demand but also gives an optimized design scheme of the FFBSSs that represents the characteristics of virtual stations.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".