Spatio-temporal analysis of Australia Post parcel locker use during the initial system growth phase in Queensland (2013–2017)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has been limited understanding of parcel locker customers' usage behaviour due a lack of operational data. Using Australia Post's dataset of 51 Queensland parcel lockers, we were able to evaluate the growth in locker locations and customers' parcel collection patterns over their formative five years (2013–2017). This allows for the in-depth spatio-temporal analysis of parcel collections, parcel dwell times, and other relevant variables using linear and mixed regression. This helped to identify the geographical factors associated with the volumes of transactions at each locker, providing new understanding of lockers by location typologies (central, suburban, regional), the separation distances from registered users' addresses (n = 23,021) to their parcel locker locations, and the use of multiple locker locations by users. We found Australia Post parcel locker use grew consistently over the initial growth stage, with noticeable peaks during summer months and holiday seasons. Most collections (40%) were completed outside normal business hours, supporting the 24/7 service advantage. Locker use was higher during weekdays, with peaks around the morning and evening travel peak hours and during lunch breaks within the day. Lunchtime pickups were especially pronounced in central city locations. Parcel dwell times (from notification to collection) were fairly stable (mean 15.53 mins; standard deviation (SD) 20.94 mins), but with weekend collections taking considerably longer than on weekdays. Multiple locker users were more likely to be located in dense urban areas where they could conveniently register to use lockers near both their homes and workplace. Distance from home to locker ranged widely, with extremely high standard deviations seen in Queensland as a whole (mean 23.07 km; median 3.35 km; SD 138.17 km) and also in Brisbane (mean 9.99 km; median 2.61 km; SD 85.42 km) – this suggests usage by individuals from out-of-town. Parcel locker users who made a pickup in the central business district of Brisbane often had suburban residential addresses closer to suburban parcel locker locations, suggesting they were commuters. This study presented novel empirical findings of the spatial and temporal use patterns of last-mile delivery that can inform the future development of parcel locker 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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".