MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404354661 · doi:10.1016/j.trc.2024.104916

Reinforced stable matching for Crowd-Sourced Delivery Systems under stochastic driver acceptance behavior

2024· article· en· W4404354661 on OpenAlexaff
Shixuan Hou, Wang Chun, Jie Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Part C Emerging Technologies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMatching (statistics)Computer scienceTransport engineeringEngineeringSimulationMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crowd-Sourced Delivery Systems (CDS) depend on occasional drivers to deliver parcels directly to online customers. These freelance drivers have the flexibility to accept or reject orders from the platform, leading to a stochastic and often unstable matching process for delivery assignments. This instability results in frequent rematching, delayed deliveries, decreased customer satisfaction, and increased operational costs, all highlighting the critical need for improved matching stability within CDS. While traditional stable matching theory provides a foundation, it primarily addresses static and deterministic scenarios, making it less effective in the dynamic and unpredictable environments typical of CDS. Addressing this gap, this study extends the classic Gale–Shapley (GS) stable matching algorithm by incorporating tailored compensations for drivers, incentivizing them to accept assigned orders and thus improving the stability of matchings, even with the inherent uncertainties of driver acceptance. We prove that the proposed mechanism can generate reinforced stable matching results based on tailored compensation values. Also, our numerical study shows that this reinforced stable matching approach significantly outperforms traditional methods in terms of both matching stability and cost-effectiveness. It reduces the order rejection rate to as low as 1% and cuts operational costs by up to 18%.

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)0.001
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 score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Part C Emerging TechnologiesSame topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207