MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285252157 · doi:10.5267/j.ijiec.2022.3.002

Nash-stackelberg game perspective on pricing strategies for ride-hailing and aggregation platforms under bundle mode

2022· article· en· W4285252157 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Weina Xu, Gui-Hua Lin, Xide Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsStackelberg competitionBundlePricing strategiesNash equilibriumService (business)Key (lock)PopularityBusinessComputer scienceMicroeconomicsIndustrial organizationMarketingEconomicsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growing popularity of aggregation platforms has attracted widespread attention in the ride-hailing market in recent years. In order to obtain additional orders by charging commissions and slotting fees, many ride-hailing platforms choose to bundle with aggregation platforms. Unlike traditional reseller electronic channels, the bundle channels may affect pricing of platforms, service levels of drivers, market demands and they may further impact on profits. These different attitudes raise an interesting and key question about the influence of bundle channels in ride-hailing platforms. In this paper, we propose an analytical framework for pricing strategies of ride-hailing and aggregation platforms under bundle mode and analyze their pricing process from the perspective of Nash and Stackelberg games, where the platforms serve as leaders to determine optimal prices through Nash equilibrium and the drivers serve as followers to provide optimal service levels. Through sensitivity analysis of service levels and costs, we capture the distribution trends of profits between the platforms. Based on some numerical examples and results analysis, some interesting managerial insights on pricing of ride-hailing and aggregation platforms are gained.

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 score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.587

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering ComputationsSame topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207