MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409795136 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-400

Subsidy Strategies of Ride-Hailing Platforms Considering Taxi Street-Hailing during Order Overflow

2025· article· en· W4409795136 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Social Science Fund of China
KeywordsSubsidyOrder (exchange)BusinessTaxisAdvertisingEconomicsTransport engineeringEngineeringFinanceMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emergence of ride-hailing services has revolutionized the transportation industry for passengers, prompting taxi services to evolve from the conventional method of street-hailing to a combined "online-offline" operational approach.In this new model, taxis combine on-street pickups with platform-based orders.When market supply and demand are imbalanced, leading to excess orders, taxis prioritize street-hailing for faster customer acquisition.Meanwhile, ride-hailing platforms address surging passenger demand by offering subsidies to attract more vehicles to participate in online dispatching.This study focuses on the strategic choices of ride-hailing platforms and taxis during order overflow scenarios.An evolutionary game model is constructed to simulate taxi streethailing behavior under such conditions.Simulations are conducted to generate interpolation-based probability curves, including the probability of taxis accepting offline orders and the probability of regional orders being served.These findings offer recommendations for ride-hailing platforms on designing subsidy strategies in response to changes in regional order density.Additionally, the study examines how factors such as order distance, passenger-seeking costs, and platform commission rates influence taxis' order acceptance strategies.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.229 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207