Modeling the Curb Parking Price in Urban Center District of China Using TSM-RAM Approach
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parking demand forecasting is an important part of urban parking planning and is also an important basis for the development of parking facilities. The primary objective of this study was to explore multiple factors that affect the curb parking price (CPP) and the changing rules of the curb parking price (CPP) with these factors and to predict the CPP in terms of urban mobility. The data were collected through a statistical survey that was administered in 81 cities in China. The cities were divided into three categories: rich cities (RCs), poor cities (PCs), and tourist cities (TCs). Both the time series method (TSM) and regression analysis method (RAM) were developed to simultaneously examine the factors associated with the CPP among parking users. The results showed that TSM and RAM can account for common urban curb parking prices. The prediction results showed that the CPP is affected by the number of urban dwellers (UD), the prevalence of car ownership (CO), and the per capita disposable income (PCDI) of urban residents; the CPP can be predicted by a model built on the basis of the above three influencing factors. The results can enhance our understanding of the factors that affect CPP. Based on the results, some suggestions regarding the use of the CPP range in parking policy planning were discussed.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it