The Single-Line Design Problem for Demand-Adaptive Transit Systems: A Modeling Framework and Decomposition Approach for the Stationary-Demand Case
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When demand for transportation is low or sparse, traditional transit cannot provide efficient and good-quality service, because of its fixed structure. For this reason, mass transit is evolving toward some degree of flexibility. Although the extension of Dial-a-Ride systems to general public meets such need of adaptability, it presents several drawbacks mostly related to the their extreme flexibility. Consequently, new transportation alternatives, such as demand-adaptive systems (DASs), combining characteristics from both the traditional transit and Dial-a-Ride, have been introduced. For their twofold nature, DASs require careful planning. We focus on tactical aspects of the planning process by formalizing the single-line DAS design problem with stationary demand and proposing two alternative hierarchical decomposition approaches for its solution. The main motivation behind this work is to provide a general methodology suitable to be used as a tool to build the tactical DAS plan in real-life conditions. We provide an experimental study where the two proposed decomposition methods are compared and the general behavior of the systems is analyzed when altering some design parameters. Furthermore, we test the versatility of our methods on a variety of situation that may be encountered in real-life conditions.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".