Discrete Train Speed Profile Optimization for Urban Rail Transit: A Data-Driven Model and Integrated Algorithms Based on Machine Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Energy-efficient train speed profile optimization problem in urban rail transit systems has attracted much attention in recent years because of the requirement of reducing operation cost and protecting the environment. Traditional methods on this problem mainly focused on formulating kinematical equations to derive the speed profile and calculate the energy consumption, which caused the possible errors due to some assumptions used in the empirical equations. To fill this gap, according to the actual speed and energy data collected from the real-world urban rail system, this paper proposes a data-driven model and integrated heuristic algorithm based on machine learning to determine the optimal speed profile with minimum energy consumption. Firstly, a data-driven optimization model (DDOM) is proposed to describe the relationship between energy consumption and discrete speed profile processed from actual data. Then, two typical machine learning algorithms, random forest regression (RFR) algorithm and support vector machine regression (SVR) algorithm, are used to identify the importance degree of velocity in the different positions of profile and calculate the traction energy consumption. Results show that the calculation average error is less than 0.1 kwh, and the energy consumption can be reduced by about 2.84% in a case study of Beijing Changping Line.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".