Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
120 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Optimal Design and Implementation of an Open-source Emulation Platform for User-Centric Shared E-mobility Services (2403.07964v2)

Published 12 Mar 2024 in cs.AI

Abstract: With the rising concern over transportation emissions and pollution on a global scale, shared electric mobility services like E-cars, E-bikes, and E-scooters have emerged as promising solutions to mitigate these pressing challenges. However, existing shared E-mobility services exhibit critical design deficiencies, including insufficient service integration, imprecise energy consumption forecasting, limited scalability and geographical coverage, and a notable absence of a user-centric perspective, particularly in the context of multi-modal transportation. More importantly, there is no consolidated open-source platform which could benefit the E-mobility research community. This paper aims to bridge this gap by providing an open-source platform for shared E-mobility. The proposed platform, with an agent-in-the-loop approach and modular architecture, is tailored to diverse user preferences and offers enhanced customization. We demonstrate the viability of this platform by providing a comprehensive analysis for integrated multi-modal route-optimization in diverse scenarios of energy availability, user preferences and E-mobility tools placement for which we use modified Ant Colony Optimization algorithm so called Multi-Model Energy Constrained ACO (MMEC-ACO) and Q-Learning algorithms. Our findings demonstrate that Q-learning achieves significantly better performance in terms of travel time cost for more than 90\% of the instances as compared to MMEC-ACO for different scenarios including energy availability, user preference and E-mobility tools distribution. For a fixed (O, D) pair, the average execution time to achieve optimal time cost solution for MMEC-ACO is less than 2 seconds, while Q-learning reaches an optimal time cost in 20 seconds on average. For a run-time of 2 seconds, Q-learning still achieves a better optimal time cost with a 20\% reduction over MMEC-ACO's time cost.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (28)
  1. S. Alataş, “Do environmental technologies help to reduce transport sector co2 emissions? evidence from the eu15 countries,” Research in Transportation Economics, vol. 91, p. 101047, 2022, decarbonising transport. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0739885921000196
  2. I. energy agency. [Online]. Available: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics
  3. D. Godil, Z. Yu, A. Sharif, R. Usman, and S. Khan, “Investigate the role of technology innovation and renewable energy in reducing transport sector co 2 emission in china: A path toward sustainable development,” Sustainable Development, vol. 29, 02 2021.
  4. M. Liu, “Fed-bev: A federated learning framework for modelling energy consumption of battery electric vehicles,” in 2021 IEEE 94th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2021-Fall), 2021, pp. 1–7.
  5. bbva. [Online]. Available: https://www.bbva.ch/en/news/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-electric-mobility/
  6. G. Dias, E. Arsenio, and P. Ribeiro, “The role of shared e-scooter systems in urban sustainability and resilience during the covid-19 mobility restrictions,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 13, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/13/7084
  7. A. Nikitas, S. Tsigdinos, C. Karolemeas, E. Kourmpa, and E. Bakogiannis, “Cycling in the era of covid-19: Lessons learnt and best practice policy recommendations for a more bike-centric future,” Sustainability, vol. 13, p. 4620, 04 2021.
  8. F. Liao and G. Correia, “Electric carsharing and micromobility: A literature review on their usage pattern, demand, and potential impacts,” International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 269–286, 2022.
  9. K.-S. Cho, S.-W. Park, and S.-Y. Son, “Digital twin-based simulation platform with integrated e-mobility and distribution system,” in CIRED Porto Workshop 2022: E-mobility and power distribution systems, vol. 2022.   IET, 2022, pp. 1158–1162.
  10. M. Ferrara, B. Monechi, G. Valenti, C. Liberto, M. Nigro, and I. Biazzo, “A simulation tool for energy management of e-mobility in urban areas,” in 2019 6th International Conference on Models and Technologies for Intelligent Transportation Systems (MT-ITS).   IEEE, 2019, pp. 1–7.
  11. D. Echternacht, I. El Haouati, R. Schermuly, and F. Meyer, “Simulating the impact of e-mobility charging infrastructure on urban low-voltage networks,” in NEIS 2018; Conference on Sustainable Energy Supply and Energy Storage Systems.   VDE, 2018, pp. 1–6.
  12. T. Campisi, N. Ali, K. D. Alemdar, Ö. Kaya, M. Y. Çodur, and G. Tesoriere, “Promotion of e-mobility and its main share market: Some considerations about e-shared mobility,” in AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 2611, no. 1.   AIP Publishing LLC, 2022, p. 060002.
  13. K. Laurischkat, A. Viertelhausen, and D. Jandt, “Business models for electric mobility,” Procedia Cirp, vol. 47, pp. 483–488, 2016.
  14. M. Luo, B. Du, K. Klemmer, H. Zhu, and H. Wen, “Deployment optimization for shared e-mobility systems with multi-agent deep neural search,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 2549–2560, 2021.
  15. M. Luo, B. Du, W. Zhang, T. Song, K. Li, H. Zhu, M. Birkin, and H. Wen, “Fleet rebalancing for expanding shared e-mobility systems: A multi-agent deep reinforcement learning approach,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2023.
  16. T. Duraisamy and D. Kaliyaperumal, “Adaptive passive balancing in battery management system for e‐mobility,” International Journal of Energy Research, vol. 45, 02 2021.
  17. Y. Chen, G. Wu, R. Sun, A. Dubey, A. Laszka, and P. Pugliese, “A review and outlook on energy consumption estimation models for electric vehicles,” SAE International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, Energy, Environment, & Policy, vol. 2, 03 2021.
  18. Moovit. [Online]. Available: https://moovitapp.com/sf_bay_area_ca-22/poi/en-gb
  19. Bird. [Online]. Available: https://www.bird.co/
  20. ElectricFeel. [Online]. Available: https://www.electricfeel.com/
  21. W. Mobility. [Online]. Available: https://www.wundermobility.com/
  22. T. Buchmann, P. Wolf, and S. Fidaschek, “Stimulating e-mobility diffusion in germany (emosim): An agent-based simulation approach,” Energies, vol. 14, no. 3, p. 656, 2021.
  23. C. Wu, A. Kreidieh, K. Parvate, E. Vinitsky, and A. M. Bayen, “Flow: Architecture and benchmarking for reinforcement learning in traffic control,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.05465, vol. 10, 2017.
  24. J. Barceló and J. Casas, “Dynamic network simulation with aimsun,” Simulation approaches in transportation analysis: Recent advances and challenges, pp. 57–98, 2005.
  25. M. Fellendorf and P. Vortisch, “Microscopic traffic flow simulator vissim,” Fundamentals of traffic simulation, pp. 63–93, 2010.
  26. D. Krajzewicz, G. Hertkorn, C. Rössel, and P. Wagner, “Sumo (simulation of urban mobility)-an open-source traffic simulation,” in Proceedings of the 4th middle East Symposium on Simulation and Modelling (MESM20002), 2002, pp. 183–187.
  27. E. Burani, G. Cabri, and M. Leoncini, “An algorithm to predict e-bike power consumption based on planned routes,” Electronics, vol. 11, no. 7, p. 1105, Mar. 2022. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/electronics11071105
  28. M. Liu, J. Naoum-Sawaya, Y. Gu, F. Lecue, and R. Shorten, “A distributed markovian parking assist system,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 2230–2240, 2019.
Citations (1)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com