MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293711790 · doi:10.1155/2022/8062932

Electric Kickboard Demand Prediction in Spatiotemporal Dimension Using Clustering-Aided Bagging Regressor

2022· article· en· W4293711790 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Parking Systems Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJeju National University
KeywordsCluster analysisDimension (graph theory)Demand forecastingComputer scienceData miningArtificial intelligenceStatisticsPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsOperations research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Demand for electric kickboards is increasing specifically in tourist-centric regions worldwide. In order to gain a competitive edge and to provide quality service to customers, it is essential to properly deploy rental electric kickboards (e-kickboards) at the time and place customers want. However, it is necessary to study how to divide the region to predict electric mobility demand by region. Therefore, this study is made to more accurately predict future demand based on past regional customers’ electric mobility demand data. We have proposed a novel electric kickboard demand prediction in spatiotemporal dimension using clustering-aided bagging regressor. We have used electric kickboard usage data from a Jeju, South Korea-based company. As a result of the experiment, it was found that the accuracy before using clustering-based bagging regressor and when the region was divided by the clustering method, the performance was improved, and we have achieved a regression score <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"> <a:mfenced open="(" close=")" separators="|"> <a:mrow> <a:msup> <a:mrow> <a:mi>R</a:mi> </a:mrow> <a:mrow> <a:mn>2</a:mn> </a:mrow> </a:msup> </a:mrow> </a:mfenced> </a:math> of 93.42 using our proposed approach. We have compared our proposed approach with other state-of-the-art models, and we have also compared our model with different other combinations of bagging regressors. This study can be helpful for companies to meet the user’s demand for a better quality of service.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.243 · 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