MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282938567 · doi:10.1155/2022/1905526

A Long-Term Shared Autonomous Vehicle System Design Problem considering Relocation and Pricing

2022· article· en· W4282938567 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jingjing Tian, Hongfei Jia, Guanfeng Wang, Yu Lin, Ruiyi Wu, Ao Lv

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRelocationComputer scienceMathematical optimizationSolverParticle swarm optimizationOperations researchOptimization problemEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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