An Alternative Fuel Refueling Station Location Model considering Detour Traffic Flows on a Highway Road System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the development of alternative fuel (AF) vehicle technologies, studies on finding the potential location of AF refueling stations in transportation networks have received considerable attention. Due to the strong limited driving range, AF vehicles for long-distance intercity trips may require multiple refueling stops at different locations on the way to their destination, which makes the AF refueling station location problem more challenging. In this paper, we consider that AF vehicles requiring multiple refueling stops at different locations during their long-distance intercity trips are capable of making detours from their preplanned paths and selecting return paths that may be different from original paths for their round trips whenever AF refueling stations are not available along the preplanned paths. These options mostly need to be considered when an AF refueling infrastructure is not fully developed on a highway system. To this end, we first propose an algorithm to generate alternative paths that may provide the multiple AF refueling stops between all origin/destination (OD) vertices. Then, a new mixed-integer programming model is proposed to locate AF refueling stations within a preselected set of candidate sites on a directed transportation network by maximizing the coverage of traffic flows along multiple paths. We first test our mathematical model with the proposed algorithm on a classical 25-vertex network with 25 candidate sites through various scenarios that consider a different number of paths for each OD pair, deviation factors, and limited driving ranges of vehicles. Then, we apply our proposed model to locate liquefied natural gas refueling stations in the state of Pennsylvania considering the construction budget. Our results show that the number of alternative paths and deviation distance available significantly affect the coverage of traffic flows at the stations as well as computational time.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".