A Spatiotemporal Prediction Model for Regional Scheduling of Shared Bicycles Based on the INLA Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dock-less bicycle-sharing programs have been widely accepted as an efficient mode to benefit health and reduce congestions. And modeling and prediction has always been a core proposition in the field of transportation. Most of the existing demand prediction models for shared bikes take regions as research objects; therefore, a POI-based method can be a beneficial complement to existing research, including zone-level, OD-level, and station-level techniques. Point of interest (POI) is the location description of spatial entities, which can reflect the cycling route characteristics for both commuting and noncommuting trips to a certain extent, and is also the main generating point and attraction point of shared-bike travel flow. In this study, we make an effort to model a POI-level cycling demand with a Bayesian hierarchical method. The proposed model combines the integrated nested Laplace approximation (INLA) and random partial differential equation (SPDE) to cope with the huge computation in the modeling process. In particular, we have adopted the dock-less bicycle-sharing rental records of Mobike as a case study to validate our method; the study area was one of the fastest growing urban districts in Shanghai in August 2016. The operation results show that the method can help better understand, measure, and characterize spatiotemporal patterns of bike-share ridership at the POI level and quantify the impact of the spatiotemporal effect on bicycle-sharing use.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".