MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972680096 · doi:10.1287/trsc.2020.1018

Electric Vehicle Routing with Public Charging Stations

2021· article· en· W2972680096 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsTransport CanadaHEC Montréal
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)Routing (electronic design automation)QueueStatic routingComputer scienceElectric vehicleOperations researchComputer networkEngineeringRouting protocol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce the electric vehicle routing problem with public-private recharging strategy in which vehicles may recharge en route at public charging infrastructure as well as at a privately-owned depot. To hedge against uncertain demand at public charging stations, we design routing policies that anticipate station queue dynamics. We leverage a decomposition to identify good routing policies, including the optimal static policy and fixed-route-based rollout policies that dynamically respond to observed queues. The decomposition also enables us to establish dual bounds, providing a measure of goodness for our routing policies. In computational experiments using real instances from industry, we show the value of our policies to be within 10% of a dual bound. Furthermore, we demonstrate that our policies significantly outperform the industry-standard routing strategy in which vehicle recharging generally occurs at a central depot. Our methods stand to reduce the operating costs associated with electric vehicles, facilitating the transition from internal-combustion engine vehicles.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.201 · 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