skip to main content
10.1145/3097983.3098018acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageskddConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

The Simpler The Better: A Unified Approach to Predicting Original Taxi Demands based on Large-Scale Online Platforms

Authors Info & Claims
Published:13 August 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

Taxi-calling apps are gaining increasing popularity for their efficiency in dispatching idle taxis to passengers in need. To precisely balance the supply and the demand of taxis, online taxicab platforms need to predict the Unit Original Taxi Demand (UOTD), which refers to the number of taxi-calling requirements submitted per unit time (e.g., every hour) and per unit region (e.g., each POI). Predicting UOTD is non-trivial for large-scale industrial online taxicab platforms because both accuracy and flexibility are essential. Complex non-linear models such as GBRT and deep learning are generally accurate, yet require labor-intensive model redesign after scenario changes (e.g., extra constraints due to new regulations). To accurately predict UOTD while remaining flexible to scenario changes, we propose LinUOTD, a unified linear regression model with more than 200 million dimensions of features. The simple model structure eliminates the need of repeated model redesign, while the high-dimensional features contribute to accurate UOTD prediction. We further design a series of optimization techniques for efficient model training and updating. Evaluations on two large-scale datasets from an industrial online taxicab platform verify that LinUOTD outperforms popular non-linear models in accuracy. We envision our experiences to adopt simple linear models with high-dimensional features in UOTD prediction as a pilot study and can shed insights upon other industrial large-scale spatio-temporal prediction problems.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

ye_online_platforms.mp4

mp4

402.3 MB

References

  1. Didi Chuxing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Didi_Chuxing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Grab. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grab_(application).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Uber. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uber_(company).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. A Anwar, M. Volkov, and D. Rus. 2013. Changinow: A mobile application for efficient taxi allocation at airports. In 16th International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems, The Hague, The Netherlands. 694--701. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. T. Cover and J. Thomas. 2006. Elements of information theory (2. ed.).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. J. Dean, G. Corrado, R. Monga, K. Chen, M. Devin, M. Mao, A. Senior, P. Tucker, K. Yang, and Q. Le. 2012. Large scale distributed deep networks. In Advances in neural information processing systems. 1232--1240.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. J. Friedman. 2001. Greedy function approximation: a gradien boosting machine. Annals of statistics(2001).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. X. He, J. Pan, O. Jin, T. Xu, B. Liu, T. Xu, Y. Shi, A. Atallah R. Herbrich, and S. Bowers. 2014. Practical lessons from predicting clicks on ads at facebook. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Workshop on Data Mining for Online Advertising, New York City, New York, USA. 5:1--5:9. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. G. Hinton and R. Salakhutdinov. 2006. Reducing the dimensionalit of data with neural networks. Science(2006), 504--507. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Q. Ho, J. Cipar, H. Cui, S. Lee, J. Kim, P. Gibbons, G. Gibson, G. Ganger, and E. Xing. 2013. More effective distributed ml via a stale synchronous parallel parameter server. In Advances in neural information processing systems. 1223--1231.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. M. Li, D. Andersen, J. Park, A. Smola, A. Ahmed, V. Josifovski, J. Long, E. Shekita, and B. Su. 2014. Scaling distributed machine learning with the parameter server. In 11th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, Broomfield, CO, USA. 583--598. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Y. Li, Y. Zheng, Y. Zhang, and L. Chen. 2015. Traffic prediction in a bike-sharing system. In Proceedings of the 23rd SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems, Bellevue, WA, USA. 33:1--33:10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. B. McMahan, G Holt, D Sculley, M. Young, D. Ebner, J. Grady, L. Nie, T. Phillips, E. Davydov, D. Golovin, S. Chikkerur, D. Liu, M. Wattenberg, A. Hrafnkelsson, T. Boulos, and J. Kubica. 2013. Ad click prediction: a view from the trenches. In The 19th ACM International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Chicago, IL, USA. 1222--1230. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. L. Moreira-Matias, J. Gama, M. Ferreira, J. Mendes-Moreira, and L. Damas. 2013. Predicting taxi-passenger demand using streaming data. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems (2013), 1393--1402. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. N. Mukai and N. Yoden. 2012. Taxi demand forecasting based on taxi probe data by neural network. In Intelligent Interactive Multimedia: Systems and Services. 589--597. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. J. Sun, D. Papadias, Y. Tao, and B. Liu. 2004. Querying about the past, the present, and the future in spatio-temporal. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Data Engineering, Boston, MA, USA. 202--213. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Y. Tong, Y. Chen, Z. Zhou, L. Chen, J. Wang, Q. Yang, and J. Ye. 2017. The simpler the better: a unified approach to predicting original taxi demands on large-scale online platforms (Techinical report). http://www.cse.ust.hk/~yxtong/tr_prediction.pdf. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Y. Tong, J. She, B. Ding, L. Chen, T. Wo, and K. Xu. 2016. Online Minimum Matching in Real-Time Spatial Data: Experiments and Analysis. In Proceedings of the 42nd International Conference on Very Large Databases, New Delhi, India. 109--118. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Y. Tong, J. She, B. Ding, L. Wang, and L. Chen. 2016. Online mobile Micro-Task Allocation in spatial crowdsourcing. In 32nd IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering, Helsinki, Finland. 49--60. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. V. Vapnik and V. Vapnik. 1998. Statistical learning theory. Wiley New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Li X., Pan G., Wu Z., Qi G., S. Li, D Zhang, W. Zhang, and Z. Wang. 2012. Prediction of urban human mobility using large-scale taxi traces and its applications. Frontiers of Computer Science in China (2012), 111--121.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. L. Xiao. 2010. Dual averaging methods for regularized stochastic learning and online optimization. Journal of Machine Learning Research (2010), 2543--2596.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. J. Yuan, Y. Zheng, X. Xie, and G. Sun. 2011. Driving with knowledge from the physical world. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Diego, CA, USA. 316--324. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. J. Yuan, Y. Zheng, C. Zhang, W. Xie, G. Xie, X.and Sun, and Y. Huang. 2010. T-drive: driving directions based on taxi trajectories. In 18th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Symposium on Advances in Geographic Information Systems, San Jose, CA, USA, Proceedings. 99--108.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. J. Yuan, Y. Zheng, L. Zhang, X. Xie, and G. Sun. Where to find my next passenger. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on Ubiquitous computing, Beijing, China. 109--118. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. M. Zeiler. 2012. ADADELTA: an adaptive learning rate method. arXiv preprint (2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. K. Zhang, Z. Feng, S. Chen, K. Huang, and G. Wang. 2016. A Framework for Passengers Demand Prediction and Recommendation. In IEEE International Conference on Services Computing, San Francisco, CA, USA. 340--347. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. K. Zhao, D. Khryashchev, J. Freire, C. Silva, and H. Vo. 2016. Predicting taxi demand at high spatial resolution: approaching the limit of predictability. In 2016 IEEE International Conference on Big Data, Washington DC, USA. 833--842. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Y. Zheng, L. Capra, O. Wolfson, and H. Yang. 2014. Urban computing: concepts, methodologies, and applications. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (2014), 38:1--38:55.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Y. Zheng, Y. Liu, J. Yuan, and X. Xie. 2011. Urban computing with taxicabs. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on Ubiquitous computing, Beijing, China. 89--98 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. The Simpler The Better: A Unified Approach to Predicting Original Taxi Demands based on Large-Scale Online Platforms

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        KDD '17: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining
        August 2017
        2240 pages
        ISBN:9781450348874
        DOI:10.1145/3097983

        Copyright © 2017 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 13 August 2017

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        KDD '17 Paper Acceptance Rate64of748submissions,9%Overall Acceptance Rate1,133of8,635submissions,13%

        Upcoming Conference

        KDD '24

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader