Transit facility allocation: Hybrid quantum-classical optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An essential consideration in urban transit facility planning is service efficiency and accessibility. Previous research has shown that reducing the number of facilities along a route may increase efficiency but decrease accessibility. Striking a balance between these two is a critical consideration in transit planning. Transit facility consolidation is a cost-effective way to improve the quality of service by strategically determining the desirable allocation of a limited number of facilities. This paper develops an optimization framework that integrates Geographical Information systems (GIS), decision-making analysis, and quantum technologies for addressing the problem of facility consolidation. Our proposed framework includes a novel mathematical model that captures non-linear interactions between facilities and surrounding demand nodes, inter-facility competition, ridership demand and spatial coverage. The developed model can harness the power of quantum effects such as superposition and quantum tunnelling and enables transportation planners to utilize the most recent hardware solutions such as quantum and digital annealers, coherent Ising Machines and gate-based universal quantum computers. This study presents a real-world application of the framework to the public transit facility redundancy problem in the British Columbia Vancouver metropolitan area. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework by reducing the number of facilities by 40% while maintaining the same service accessibility. Additionally, we showcase the ability of the proposed mathematical model to take advantage of quantum annealing and classical optimization techniques.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".