MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306950013 · doi:10.1155/2022/6431231

Synergistic Optimization Method for URT Network Train Connection Scheme in Peak and Off-Peak Periods

2022· article· en· W4306950013 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ruihua Xu, Xuyang Song, Zhou Feng, Fangsheng Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTrainTransfer (computing)Connection (principal bundle)Genetic algorithmPlan (archaeology)Computer scienceScheme (mathematics)Transfer stationSimulationRail networkUrban rail transitRail transitFlow (mathematics)EngineeringTransport engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we developed a method for coordinating and optimizing the train connection plans of different lines under the conditions of urban rail transit (URT) network operation. The method allows trains of different lines to form good connections at transfer stations, which can shorten the waiting time of passengers for transfers and reduce passenger retention. A mathematical model was developed to simulate the interaction between passengers and trains. Two optimization models were developed for the train connection plan of network transfer stations based on different optimization objectives during peak and off-peak hours. Subsequently, a corresponding solution method based on a genetic algorithm and simulation was designed. Finally, the Suzhou URT network was used as a case study, and the passenger flow of the transfer station was simulated and calculated using relevant automatic fare collection (AFC) data. The results indicated that the average waiting time and the number of passengers stranded were reduced using the proposed method. The calculation example demonstrated the effectiveness of the model and algorithm, which can guide the coordinated preparation of a network train connection plan.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.309
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207