MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187548265 · doi:10.1155/2021/3529984

A MultiObjective Optimization Approach for Integrated Timetabling and Vehicle Scheduling with Uncertainty

2021· article· en· W3187548265 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yindong Shen, Wenliang Xie, Jingpeng Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMathematical optimizationRobustness (evolution)Multi-objective optimizationComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)ScheduleJob shop schedulingPareto principleOperations researchEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The timetabling problem (TTP) and vehicle scheduling problem (VSP) are two indispensable problems in public transit planning process. They used to be solved in sequence; hence, optimality of resulting solutions is compromised. To get better results, some integrated approaches emerge to solve the TTP and VSP as an integrated problem. In the existing integrated approaches, the passenger comfort on bus and the uncertainty in the real world are rarely considered. To provide better service for passengers and enhance the robustness of the schedule to be compiled, we study the integrated optimization of TTP and VSP with uncertainty. In this paper, a novel multiobjective optimization approach with the objectives of minimizing the passenger travel cost, the vehicle scheduling cost, and the incompatible trip-link cost is proposed. Meanwhile, a multiobjective hybrid algorithm, which is a combination of the self-adjust genetic algorithm (SGA), large neighborhood search (LNS) algorithm, and Pareto separation operator (PSO), is applied to solve the integrated optimization problem. The experimental results show that the approach outperforms existing approaches in terms of service level and robustness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.304
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207