Exploring for Route Preferences of Subway Passengers Using Smart Card and Train Log Data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the mode share of the subway in Seoul has increased, the estimation of passenger travel routes has become a crucial issue to identify the congestion sections in the subway network. This paper aims to estimate the travel train of subway passengers in Seoul. The alternative routes are generated based on the train log data. The travel route is then estimated by the empirical cumulative distribution functions (ECDFs) of access time, egress time, and transfer time. The train choice probability is estimated for alternative train combinations and the train combination with the highest probability is assigned to the subway passenger. The estimated result is validated using the transfer gate data which are recorded on private subway lines. The result showed that the accuracy of the estimated travel train is shown to be 95.6%. The choice ratios for no-transfer, one-transfer, two-transfer, three-transfer, and four-transfer trips are estimated to be 53.9%, 37.7%, 6.5%, 1.5%, and 0.4%, respectively. Regarding the practical application, the passenger kilometers by lines are estimated with the travel route estimation of the whole network. As results of the passenger kilometer calculation, the passenger kilometer of the proposed algorithm is estimated to be 88,314 million passenger kilometer. The proposed algorithm estimates the passenger kilometer about 13% higher than the shortest path algorithm. This result implies that the passengers do not always prefer the shortest path and detour about 13% for their convenience.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it