MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203728894 · doi:10.1155/2021/5563205

Morning Peak-Period Pricing Surcharge of Elderly Passengers Taking Express Buses

2021· article· en· W3203728894 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jingxu Chen, Chengxin He, Xinlian Yu, Wendong Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesGovernment of Jiangsu ProvinceNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTransport engineeringScheme (mathematics)MorningComputer scienceElderly peopleOperations researchMeasure (data warehouse)EngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study deals with the elderly fare pricing issue for taking express buses in the morning peak period. As many elderly passengers are not commuters, fare discount policy may not be an opportune option when buses get overcrowded. Imposing surcharge on the elderly becomes a potentially beneficial measure that encourages an appropriate number of elderly passengers to circumvent the most crowded buses. The elderly pricing surcharge problem is formulated as a bilevel model, in which the upper-level model is to make the pricing surcharge decision, and the lower-level model is the equilibrium passenger assignment that represents passengers’ bus choice behavior. It is classified into the special case and the generic case depending on the number of buses that impose surcharge. Several useful properties of two cases are analyzed, and a trial-and-error solution method is later developed to solve these two cases. Numerical experiments show that the elderly pricing surcharge scheme is not always applicable to all the demand scenarios, which owns a certain effective interval.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.702
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207