MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972375079 · doi:10.1109/cdc40024.2019.9030043

On Re-Balancing Self-Interested Agents in Ride-Sourcing Transportation Networks

2019· preprint· en· W2972375079 on OpenAlexafffund
Armin Sadeghi, Stephen L. Smith

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceControl (management)Operations researchProfit (economics)Set (abstract data type)BusinessMicroeconomicsEngineeringEconomicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on the problem of controlling self-interested drivers in ride-sourcing applications. Each driver has the objective of maximizing its profit, while the ride-sourcing company focuses on customer experience by seeking to minimizing the expected wait time for pick-up. These objectives are not usually aligned, and the company has no direct control on the waiting locations of the drivers. In this paper, we provide two indirect control methods to optimize the set of waiting locations of the drivers, thereby minimizing the expected wait time of the customers: 1) sharing the location of all drivers with a subset of drivers, and 2) paying the drivers to relocate. We show that finding the optimal control for each method is NP-hard and we provide algorithms to find near-optimal control in each case. We evaluate the performance of the proposed control methods on real-world data and show that we can achieve between 20% to 80% improvement in the expected response.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207