A Dynamic Ridesplitting Method With Potential Pick-Up Probability Based on GPS Trajectories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ridesplitting is a convenient and budget-friendly for-hire transportation service to arrange one-time shared rides on-the-fly. One crucial component for a ridesplitting system is the effective and efficient rider allocation method to match drivers to riders. Due to the uncertainty of ride requests, the difficulty in locating new riders is one of the problems in rider allocations. In this paper, a dynamic ridesplitting method based on the potential pick-up probability named DRPP is proposed. Given drivers and riders, DRPP aims to allocate the riders to maximize the drivers’ potential pick-up probability, subject to the riders’ time constraints and drivers’ capacity constraint. In DRPP, a grid network is first constructed to predict each grid’s pick-up probability and the traveling time between grids from historical GPS trajectories. To allocate multiple riders, an iterated local search method called ILSAS is proposed to find the solution with overall maximized potential pick-up probability for the drivers. Moreover, we propose the data structure TKdS-tree to improve the rider allocation efficiency. DRPP is evaluated on two real trajectory datasets. The experiment shows that DRPP performed better than other methods in service rate, share rate, and rider waiting time.
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) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 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".