A High-Demand Hour in a Context-Specific Screening Task
Abstract
The question concerns illustrative high-demand hour under operating availability. The secondary ordinary least squares analysis contains 8,465 observations and uses cluster covariance. The coefficient on Temperature is 0.0157, with a 95 percent interval from 0.0121 to 0.0192. A high-demand event changes the screening question without establishing a required fleet size. Contextual selection motivates comparing actions by hour and environment. Personalized-medicine selection provides an analogy about indexed decisions rather than a clinical claim about these mobility records. Independent action outcomes are needed before a demand signal becomes an evaluated resource policy. The estimates describe the released collection and its conditioning set. No new data collection, simulator experiment, or deployment-policy evaluation is claimed.
References
S. Cakmak, Y. Wang, S. Gao, and E. Zhou, “Contextual Ranking and Selection with Gaussian Processes and Optimal Computing Budget Allocation,” ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 1–24, 2024.
J. Du, S. Gao, and C.-H. Chen, “A Contextual Ranking and Selection Method for Personalized Medicine,” Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 167–181, 2024.
Seoul Bike Sharing Demand. UCI Machine Learning Repository, 2020. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.24432/C5F62R.
White, Halbert. “A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity.” Econometrica, vol. 48, no. 4, 1980, pp. 817–838. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912934.
Cameron, A. Colin, and Douglas L. Miller. “A Practitioner’s Guide to Cluster-Robust Inference.” Journal of Human Resources, vol. 50, no. 2, 2015, pp. 317–372. https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.50.2.317.
Rasmussen, Carl Edward, and Christopher K. I. Williams. Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning. MIT Press, 2006. https://gaussianprocess.org/gpml/.
Ankenman, Bruce, Barry L. Nelson, and Jeremy Staum. “Stochastic Kriging for Simulation Metamodeling.” Operations Research, vol. 58, no. 2, 2010, pp. 371–382. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.1090.0754.
Kim, Seong-Hee, and Barry L. Nelson. “A Fully Sequential Procedure for Indifference-Zone Selection in Simulation.” ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, vol. 11, no. 3, 2001, pp. 251–273. https://doi.org/10.1145/502109.502111.
Frazier, Peter I., Warren B. Powell, and Savas Dayanik. “A Knowledge-Gradient Policy for Sequential Information Collection.” SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, vol. 47, no. 5, 2008, pp. 2410–2439. https://doi.org/10.1137/070693424.
Bertsimas, Dimitris, and Melvyn Sim. “The Price of Robustness.” Operations Research, vol. 52, no. 1, 2004, pp. 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.1030.0065.