MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390964454 · doi:10.1155/2024/5964428

Driving Strategy Using an Improved Ant Colony System for Energy‐Efficient Train

2024· article· en· W4390964454 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chengda Yang, Kun Miao, Jieyuan Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Systems and Energy Efficiency
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Hunan ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAnt colony optimization algorithmsANTAnt colonyComputer scienceEnergy (signal processing)Automotive engineeringSimulationTransport engineeringOperations researchEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optimal energy‐efficient train operation optimization is one of the widely studied areas in transportation science, which can significantly reduce energy consumption that accounts for a large proportion of operating costs. In order to adapt to the complex and changeable railway line conditions such as gradient, slope length, and speed limit and avoid the error in tracking speed curve, an optimal driving strategy decision‐making (ODSD) model is proposed in this paper. The model considers the non‐fixed sequence of driving regimes, and the regimes are directly selected in the discrete micro‐subsegments of an equal time‐division pattern. To solve this model efficiently, an improved ant colony system algorithm with the difference edges (ACSd) is proposed, which takes the heuristic effect of the difference between the best solutions of two adjacent iterations, i.e., “the difference edges,” into account. Additionally, energy‐efficient heuristic factor and speed heuristic factor are presented to balance energy saving and speed. The results demonstrate that ACSd performs better than the basic ant colony system algorithm in solving traveling salesman problem (TSP) and provides more flexible driving strategies for the ODSD model.

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)0.000
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 score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicRailway Systems and Energy EfficiencyFrench-language works237,207