An Optimization Method of High-Speed Railway Rescheduling to Meet Unexpected Large Passenger Flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the rapidly changing multimodal transportation market, not only the obligation in providing train services but also the responsibility in helping other transportation modes to meet emergencies are instrumental for maximizing the generalized benefit of railway companies, leading to an increased utilization. This paper proposes an optimization framework, which includes multiple dispatching measures of arranging residual seats, modifying stopping plans, and inserting additional trains, to design a rescheduling operation plan on a high-speed rail corridor to meet the passenger demand of unexpected large passenger flow (ULPF), which is generated from the disruption of other transportation modes. Considering the revenues of shifting passengers and the costs of the three dispatching measures as two objectives, we formulate a linear integer programming (LIP) model by employing a time-space network to obtain an optimization rescheduling operation plan. Several experiments based on the Beijing-Shanghai high-speed railway corridor are conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed model. The experimental results demonstrate that the proposed model can be used to obtain a reasonable rescheduling operation plan for serving the passengers from ULPF within an acceptable calculation timeframe.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".