MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307555824 · doi:10.3390/en15217919

Electric Bus Scheduling and Timetabling, Fast Charging Infrastructure Planning, and Their Impact on the Grid: A Review

2022· review· en· W4307555824 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)Public transportGridCrew schedulingComputer scienceTransport engineeringOperations researchEngineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transit agencies are increasingly embracing electric buses (EB) as an energy-efficient and emission-free alternative to the conventional bus fleets. They are rapidly replacing conventional buses with electric ones. As a result, emerging challenges of electrifying public transportation bus networks in cities should be addressed. Introducing electric buses to the bus transit system would affect the public transit operation planning steps. The steps are network design, timetabling, bus scheduling, and crew scheduling. Regarding the functional and operational differences between conventional buses and electric buses, such stages should be changed and optimized to enhance the level of service for the users while reducing operating costs for service providers. Many mathematical optimization models have been developed for conventional buses. However, such models would not fit the electric buses due to EBs’ limited traveling range and long charging time. Therefore, new mathematical models should be developed to consider the unique features of electric buses. We present a comprehensive literature review to critically review and classify the work done on these topics. This paper compares the studies that have been done in this field and highlight the missing links and gaps in the considered papers, and the potential future studies that could be done. The considered papers cover the integration of timetabling and vehicle scheduling, recharging scheduling planning, and fast charging infrastructure location planning and its impacts on the grid. The main goal of this research is to highlight the research gaps and potential directions for future studies in this domain to encourage more realistic and applicable models and solution approaches for fully electric bus transit systems.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.255
Teacher spread0.241 · 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