MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Autonomous Ride-Hailing Services: A Scalable Heuristic Approach for Efficient Transportation

2024· article· en· W4402474524 on OpenAlexaff
Dariush Ebrahimi, Shantanu Patankar, Viraj Shekhda, Fadi Alzhouri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityLakehead UniversityWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalabilityHeuristicComputer scienceDistributed computingWorld Wide WebDatabaseArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One significant aspect of smart cities is the emergence of Autonomous Electric Vehicles (AEVs), which are poised to revolutionize transportation systems, offering an intelligent transportation system that surpasses traditional modes in terms of reducing carbon emissions, environmental pollution, congestion, transportation costs, and wait times. In this context, ride-hailing systems will play a pivotal role by leveraging shared AEVs to optimize transportation efficiency. This paper presents an in-depth exploration of an efficient Autonomous Driving System (ARH) that leverages a fleet of autonomous electric vehicles, enabling riders to seamlessly schedule trips while the intelligent system allocates suitable vehicles and integrates multiple ride requests. Our proposed solution aims to minimize arrival times for both AEVs and passengers by accepting the maximum number of feasible requests. To strike a balance between passenger satisfaction and system profitability, this study introduces a novel heuristic approach called Minimization of Passenger and Vehicle Time (MPVT). By adopting this approach, we aim to overcome the challenges associated with complexity and deliver a satisfactory experience for passengers while maximizing profitability for the system operator.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.223
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207