MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003938257 · doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2020.2970834

Sentiment Analysis for Driver Selection in Fuzzy Capacitated Vehicle Routing Problem With Simultaneous Pick-Up and Drop in Shared Transportation

2020· article· en· W3003938257 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSelection (genetic algorithm)Fuzzy logicVehicle routing problemProcess (computing)Routing (electronic design automation)Operations researchFuzzy setArtificial intelligenceMachine learningData miningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shared transportation involves vehicles, drivers, and customers, the interactions among which could have potential long-term impacts on the business. Machine learning techniques, and their integration with existing models, have proved to significantly improve results. Availability of extensive unstructured textual data has fostered research in text generation and mining. Cognizance and analysis of such data has become crucial for modern commercial applications. Thus, in this article, sentiment analysis, using natural language processing, is used to quantify raw customer feedback, to obtain drivers' ratings and perform driver selection. Selection of the best drivers for ferrying riders is desired and modeled accordingly. An integrated vehicle routing problem with generalized fuzzy travel durations, and uncertain pick-up and drop demands, is modeled and solved using a hybrid genetic algorithm. Fuzzy simulations in a credibilistic environment are employed to evaluate the cost function. Performance of selected drivers is used to update driver ratings for the subsequent run, and the process is repeated multiple times. The results obtained authenticate the purpose of this article, and comparative analysis is performed to further corroborate the model's capability. An additional case of triangular fuzzy ratings is also illustrated, and its impact on the model discussed. Suggestions for driver classification are also provided for personnel management.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.217 · 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