Cooperative Control of Multistation Passenger Inflows in Case of Irregular Large-Scale Passenger Flows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study focuses on the large passenger flow control problem, after an operation interruption occurs, to develop a methodology that can efficiently control the passenger inflows of multiple stations and avoid overcrowding inside stations. An early-warning model for irregular large-scale passenger flows (ILSPF) and a dynamic ILSPF control model are proposed. The early-warning model is developed to predict passenger flows in the future with historical data and detect when to start control measures in actual time. The ILSPF cooperative control model focuses on cooperatively controlling the passenger inflows of multiple stations to ensure passenger safety in vehicles and stations, as well as maximize the number of passengers transported and minimize the passengers’ total waiting times. An improved particle swarm optimization algorithm was designed to determine an optimal solution, and a case study on the Chengdu metro in China was carried out to examine the performance of the model. The obtained results verify the effectiveness of the model and algorithm and prove that ILSPF control can regulate the passenger inflow demand, better match the passenger demand and capability on the line, increase the total number of passengers transported, and balance the proportion of passenger boarding at each station.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".