MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139493565 · doi:10.1109/tte.2021.3067953

Design of a Decision-Based Multicriteria Reservation System for the EV Parking Lot

2021· article· en· W3139493565 on OpenAlexaff
Zhaleh Sadreddini, Sıtkı Güner

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Parking Systems Research
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersTürkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu
KeywordsReservationReservation systemComputer scienceOperations researchTransport engineeringEngineeringComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In metropolitans, the problem of finding available parking slots has changed as finding available parking slots having charging stations due to increasing electric vehicle (EV) deployment. Smart management systems can be used in this manner for obtaining an optimum parking slot in EV parking lots (PLs) considering EV users’ preferences. This article proposes a smart reservation system considering the behavior of EV users, parking slot availability (PSA), state-of-charge (SoC) value of EVs, and PL usage history of EV users. In order to handle weighting the behavior of EV users according to a comprehensive criteria comparison, the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) from multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques is used in the smart reservation system. Thereafter, the proposed ranking function is presented to develop the mentioned quality-of-experience (QoE)-based charging slot allocation considering the reservation requests of EV users sent via a mobile application and to accept the optimal EVs in accordance with the weights assigned by AHP. The proposed concept is tested under different cases generated by changing the individual importance degree of EV user’s criteria. The different case studies demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed decision-based multicriteria reservation system in terms of EV users’ acceptance ratio. Simulation results show that not only the importance degree related to the EV users’ criteria has an important effect in accepting appropriate EV users but also PSA management is another vital criterion especially in peak-load hours.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Transportation ElectrificationSame topicSmart Parking Systems ResearchFrench-language works237,207