SAV Operations on a Bus Line Corridor: Travel Demand, Service Frequency, and Vehicle Size
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Before shared automated vehicles (SAVs) can be widely adopted, they are anticipated to be implemented commercially in confined regions or fixed routes where the benefits of automation can be realized. SAVs have the potential to operate in a traditional transit corridor, replacing conventional transit vehicles, and have frequent interactions with riders and other vehicles sharing the same right of way. This paper microsimulates SAVs’ operation on a 6.5-mile corridor to understand how vehicle size and attributes of such SAV-based transit affect traffic, transit riders, and system costs. The SUMO (Simulation of Urban MObility) platform is employed to model microscopic interactions among SAVs, transit passengers, and other traffic. Results show that the use of smaller, but more frequent, SAVs leads to reduced passenger waiting times but increased vehicle travel times. More frequent services of smaller SAVs do not, in general, significantly affect general traffic due to shorter dwell times. Overall, using smaller SAVs instead of the large 40-seat SAVs can reduce system costs by up to 4% while also reducing passenger waiting times, under various demand levels and passenger loading factors. However, the use of 5-seat SAVs does not always have the lowest system costs.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".