Dynamic Scheduling Model of Bike-Sharing considering Invalid Demand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
System resources allocation optimization through dynamic scheduling is key to improving the service level of bike-sharing. This study innovatively introduces three types of invalid demand with negative effect including waiting, transfer, and abandoning, which consists of the total demand of bike-sharing system. Through exploring the dynamic relationship among users’ travel demands, the quantity and capacity of bikes at the rental points, the records of bicycles borrowed and returned, and the vehicle scheduling schemes, a demand forecasting model for bike-sharing is established. According to the predicted bikes and the maximum capacity limit at each rental point, an optimization model of scheduling scheme is proposed to reduce the invalid demand and the total scheduling time. A two-layer dynamic coupling model with iterative feedback is obtained by combining the demand prediction model and scheduling optimization model and is then solved by Nicked Pareto Genetic Algorithm (NPGA). The proposed model is applied to a case study and the optimal solution set and corresponding Pareto front are obtained. The invalid demand is greatly reduced from 1094 to 26 by an effective scheduling of 3 rounds and 96 minutes. Empirical results show that the proposed model is able to optimize the resource allocation of bike-sharing, significantly reduce the invalid demand caused by the absence of bikes at the rental point such as waiting in a place, walking to other rental points, and giving up for other travel modes, and effectively improve the system service level.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".