MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406227063 · doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2024.12.091

Data Driven Synchronization Strategies of a Bus Line in a Transit Network

2025· article· en· W4406227063 on OpenAlexafffundabout
KOLCHEVA Laura

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation research procedia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPolytechnique Montréal
KeywordsTransit (satellite)Line (geometry)Synchronization (alternating current)Computer scienceBus rapid transitTransport engineeringComputer networkReal-time computingPublic transportEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The waiting time of passengers at transfer stations is one of the most important criteria to measure the service quality of public transportation. Because of the stochastic nature of traffic, scheduled transfers cannot always occur. This research proposes an online control framework for a bus line using holding, skip-stop and speed change tactics. We build an arc-flow optimization model enumerating all possible tactics within a time horizon. The model minimizes total passenger travel times by improving, among others, transfer times and reducing deviations from the bus schedule. Decisions are based on real-time passenger flow data and travel times. The methodology was tested on a case study of the bus system of the city of Laval, Canada. A simulation framework has been developed, integrating data on smart card transactions and bus locations, to verify the performance and results of the optimization model. Data generation in the simulation framework is improved using a training set. Different levels of uncertainty are introduced on instances of a testing set and the resulting optimal parameters are applied to a validation set.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score0.904

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation research procediaSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207