Short-Term Forecast of Bicycle Usage in Bike Sharing Systems: A Spatial-Temporal Memory Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bike-sharing systems have made notable contributions to cities by providing green and sustainable mobility service to users. Over the years, many studies have been conducted to understand or anticipate the usage of these systems, with the hope to inform their future developments. One important task is to accurately predict usage patterns of the systems. Although many deep learning algorithms have been developed in recent years to support travel demand forecast, they have mainly been used to predict traffic volume or speed on roadways. Few studies have applied them to bike-sharing systems. Moreover, these studies usually focus on one single dataset or study area. The effectiveness and robustness of the prediction algorithms are not systematically evaluated. In this study, we propose a Spatial-Temporal Memory Network (STMN) to predict short-term usage of bicycles in bike-sharing systems. The framework employs Convolutional Long Short-Term Memory models and a feature engineering technique to capture the spatial-temporal dependencies in historical data for the prediction task. Four testing sites are used to evaluate the model. These four sites include two station-based systems (Chicago and New York) and two dockless bike-sharing systems (Singapore and New Taipei City). By assessing STMN with several baseline models, we find that STMN achieves the best overall performance in all the four cities. The model also achieves superior performance in urban areas with varying levels of bicycle usage and during peak periods when demand is high. The findings suggest the reliability of STMN in predicting bicycle usage for different types of bike-sharing systems.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".