A Long-Term Shared Autonomous Vehicle System Design Problem considering Relocation and Pricing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Compared to conventional private vehicles (CPVs), shared autonomous vehicles (SAVs) provide users the potential for the reduced value of time (VoT), improved mobility experience, and less traffic congestion. In the presence of the SAV system, numerous studies have mainly concentrated on the strategic planning and operational decision problem separately while ignoring the complicated interaction between them and the distinct features of autonomous vehicles. It is imperative to determine the relocation and pricing strategies at the operational level. In this study, in terms of the pricing strategy, we formalize a logit model to capture the mode choice behavior in a multimodal network, where the reduced VoT is considered simultaneously. A time-space network is employed to capture the daily operation problem based on the elastic demand. The minimum customer service rate is regarded as a constraint to ensure the system’s reliability. Moreover, a mixed-integer nonlinear programming (MINLP) model is formulated to jointly determine the number of stations and parking spaces, fleet size, relocation, and pricing strategies to maximize the total profit. Then, we integrate the Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) algorithm with the optimization solver Gurobi to address the complex problem. Numerical experiments and comparative analyses are conducted to demonstrate the feasibility and efficiency of the proposed model.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".