MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281703073 · doi:10.1155/2022/8579354

First-Train Timetable Synchronization in Metro Networks under Origin-Destination Demand Conditions

2022· article· en· W4281703073 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hetian Chai, Xiaopeng Tian, Huimin Niu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Systems and Energy Efficiency
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGansu Education DepartmentNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTrainHeadwayMathematical optimizationComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Genetic algorithmInterval (graph theory)Synchronization (alternating current)Operations researchNonlinear systemLine (geometry)Connection (principal bundle)Real-time computingSimulationEngineeringComputer networkMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on how to synchronize network-wide timetables of first trains in an urban metro system, in which the train-connection-based route can be exactly determined for each first-train-attached origin-destination (OD) demand pair. With the help of even headway scheduling on each line, the problem is actually to adjust the departure times of first trains and connecting trains from their origin stations and the departure interval on each line. Subjected to train operation and connection constraints, a biobjective nonlinear integer programming model is formulated to minimize the total travel time of OD-dependent passenger demands and the deviation between the known and expected schedules. Then, the Nondominated Sorted Genetic Algorithm-II (NSGA-II) is adopted to solve the proposed model, and an improved technique is elaborated to reduce the alternative route choices. Finally, numerical experiments are conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness and availability of the proposed model and methods.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.352
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicRailway Systems and Energy EfficiencyFrench-language works237,207