Taxi Demand Prediction Based on a Combination Forecasting Model in Hotspots
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
Accurate taxi demand prediction can solve the congestion problem caused by the supply-demand imbalance. However, most taxi demand studies are based on historical taxi trajectory data. In this study, we detected hotspots and proposed three methods to predict the taxi demand in hotspots. Next, we compared the predictive effect of the random forest model (RFM), ridge regression model (RRM), and combination forecasting model (CFM). Thereafter, we considered environmental and meteorological factors to predict the taxi demand in hotspots. Finally, the importance of indicators was analyzed, and the essential elements were the time, temperature, and weather factors. The results indicate that the prediction effect of CFM is better than those of RFM and RRM. The experiment obtains the relationship between taxi demand and environment and is helpful for taxi dispatching by considering additional factors, such as temperature and weather.
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