Name
Title | ||
|---|---|---|
Taxi-Based Mobility Demand Formulation and Prediction Using Conditional Generative Adversarial Network-Driven Learning Approaches |
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
In this paper, a deep learning (DL) framework was proposed to predict the taxi-passenger demand while the spatial, the temporal, and external dependencies were considered simultaneously. The proposed DL framework combined a modified density-based spatial clustering algorithm with noise (DBSCAN) and a conditional generative adversarial network (CGAN) model. More specifically, the modified DBSCAN model was applied to produce a number of sub-networks considering the spatial correlation of taxi pick-up events in the road network. And the CGAN model, fed with the historical taxi passenger demand and other conditional information, was capable to predict the taxi-passenger demands. The proposed CGAN model was made up with two long short-term memory (LSTM) neural networks, which are termed as the generative network
<inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">${G}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>
and the discriminative network
<inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">${D}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>
, respectively. Adversarial training process was conducted to the two LSTMs. In the numerical experiment, different model layouts were compared. It was found that different network layouts provided reasonable accuracy. With limited training data, more LSTM layers in the generator network resulted in not only higher accuracy, but also more difficulties in training. Comparisons were also conducted between the proposed prediction model and four typical approaches, including the moving average method, the autoregressive integrated moving method, the neural network model, and the LSTM neural network model. The comparison results showed that the proposed model outperformed all the other methods. And the repeated experiment indicated that the proposed CGAN model provided significant better predictions than the LSTM model did. Future research was recommended to include more datasets for testing the model and more information for improving predictive performance. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2019 | 10.1109/TITS.2019.2923964 | IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
Public transportation,Predictive models,Generators,Training,Roads,Numerical models,Data models | Autoregressive model,Data modeling,Simulation,Artificial intelligence,Engineering,Deep learning,Cluster analysis,Artificial neural network,Moving average,Discriminative model,DBSCAN,Machine learning | Journal |
Volume | Issue | ISSN |
20 | 10 | 1524-9050 |
Citations | PageRank | References |
2 | 0.37 | 0 |
Authors | ||
7 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hao Yu | 1 | 2 | 0.37 |
| Xiaofeng Chen | 2 | 2 | 0.37 |
| Zhenning Li | 3 | 4 | 0.72 |
| Guohui Zhang | 4 | 14 | 3.39 |
| Pan Liu | 5 | 36 | 6.75 |
| Jinfu Yang | 6 | 2 | 0.37 |
| Yin Yang | 7 | 116 | 18.48 |