MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401979611 · doi:10.1287/trsc.2022.0418

Heatmap Design for Probabilistic Driver Repositioning in Crowdsourced Delivery

2024· article· en· W4401979611 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aliaa Alnaggar, Fatma Gzara, James H. Bookbinder

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicCrowdsourcingComputer scienceTransport engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes the use of heatmaps as a control lever to manage the probabilistic repositioning of independent drivers in crowdsourced delivery platforms. The platform aims to maximize order fulfillment by dynamically matching drivers and orders and selecting heatmaps that trigger the probabilistic flow of unmatched drivers to balance driver supply and delivery requests across the service region. We develop a Markov decision process (MDP) model to sequentially select matching and heatmap decisions in which the repositioning behavior of drivers is captured by a multinomial logit discrete choice model. Because of the curse of dimensionality and the endogenous uncertainty of driver repositioning, the MDP model is solved using a rolling-horizon stochastic lookahead policy. This policy decomposes matching and heatmap decisions into two optimization problems: a two-stage stochastic programming upper bounding problem for matching decisions and a mixed-integer programming problem for heatmap decisions. We also propose a simple policy for efficiently solving large-scale problems. An extensive computational study on instances derived from the Chicago ride-hailing data set is conducted. Computational experiments demonstrate the value of heatmaps in improving order fulfillment beyond the level achieved by matching alone (up to 25%) and identify conditions that affect the benefit of using heatmaps to guide driver repositioning. Funding: The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada through Discovery Grants [Grants RGPIN-2024-04881, RGPIN-2020-04498, and RGPIN-2019-06207] awarded to the first, second, and third authors, respectively. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2022.0418 .

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 score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation ScienceSame topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207