How to Use Advanced Fleet Management System to Promote Energy Saving in Transportation: A Survey of Drivers’ Awareness of Fuel-Saving Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the broad application of advanced fleet management systems (FMSs) in third-party logistics (3PL) companies, there is a marginally limited understanding of how to employ them to enhance transport energy efficiency. In a case study of a Chinese 3PL company, this paper analyzed data obtained from the online FMS to assess drivers’ awareness of fuel-saving factors. A questionnaire was primarily designed to investigate the drivers’ awareness of fuel-saving factors based on the reliability and validity test. Then, Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), a machine learning algorithm, was utilized to explore the intrinsic impacts of various factors on fuel consumption with the outputs providing the evaluation basis for individual awareness of the drivers. The results show a significant deviation in the driver’s awareness of fuel-saving factors, among which the three indicators of engine speed, idling condition, and rolling without engine load are seriously underestimated, while the indicators related to the environment are seriously overestimated due to social expectations. In addition, the average speed was found to be the most important fuel-saving indicator besides the load. Based on these findings, this paper recommends that the 3PL companies choose a route with more freeways when planning, and the mileage should be controlled within 800 km as far as possible.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".