-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 281
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
GBFS Forecast Extension #612
Comments
Hi everybody, I have created a first proposal now. Please feel free to give me feedback. specification
This file would describe multiple forecasts. Every forecast has a probability in percent under certain conditions. That can be a geographic area (as a polygon or geohash), a period between two dates, a day of the week, a month and the weather. All these conditions are optional, as the calculation is likely to vary greatly depending on the application. All these conditions make the format a little complicated. It might be better to reduce them for the first step.
Alternatively, the weather object could be represented less specifically and simpler as an enum e.g. by the values example
final wordsSo this is just my first proposal. I guess there are a lot of ideas, to improve this proposal. So please give me feedback or add proposals. |
Hi @tobsesHub, It's an interesting idea, but I doubt if GBFS is the right place to put this kind of data in. In my opinion the goal of GBFS is to make it possible to communicate raw data of shared mobilityoperators to parties that aggregate and integrate data. It would make more sense to add this kind of inteligence at the side of the integrator instead of at the operator's side. That make's it easier to have consistent predictions behaviour across all operators. |
@sven4all Thanks, that's a good point. |
I am not aware of that at this moment. I think the best approach is to just get started. During the experimental fase of developing this you will be the only integrator that is doing this. If there is in the future a need to combine predictions of different integrators with each other it's the moment to develop an new standard (or you are defacto the standard because you was the first one). |
To widen the discussion: When it comes to operations and predicting where shared vehicles without time slot reservation are available in the future I think the operator himself has the most information and best knowledge to make predictions. He is the only one you knows what his operations team is planning. They may plan to redistribute existing vehicles, put in new ones etc. And he has (should have) the most data regarding historical demand. |
|
Okay, good points. I'm not sure at the moment. @tdelmas |
As a consumer, how do you suggest the data is used? I think this could be simplified greatly, given a certain time and location, will there or will there not be a vehicle available? Everything else is noise and will lead to different consumers showing different truths to users. Maybe probability is ok, assuming this probability is shown to the user. However, journey planner engines don't work with probabilities. |
I'm a bit sceptic whether a purely probabilistic approach is a) useful for consumers and b) feasible for providers. |
If you are new to the specification, please introduce yourself (name and organization/link to GBFS). It’s helpful to know who we're chatting with!
Hi, I'm Tobias Walter and I'm a software developer at Raumobil GmbH.
We develop MaaS software and offer, for example, information on renting bicycles and scooters on a map. We also offer routing for rental bikes.
And this is where I come to the context of the topic:
We at Raumobil GmbH are currently working on a research project in which we offer the possibility of calculating a routing with rental bikes in the future.
To do this, we use forecast data that shows how likely it is that a free bike will be available in a certain area at a certain time. While we are working on this project, we are considering the possibility of extending the GBFS standard.
What is the issue and why is it an issue?
There is currently no way of representing forecast data for the availability of vehicles or stations in the future.
It could be interesting to extend the GBFS standard for this use case.
We discussed already a little bit on the slack channel: https://mobilitydata-io.slack.com/archives/CNXA9ASBV/p1705512299616699
We can continue the discussion here to get a proposal for such an extension.
Please describe some potential solutions you have considered (even if they aren’t related to GBFS).
This would probably be a new optional file that could contain the following, for example
There are a few other factors that could probably also be part of such a norm:
Is your potential solution a breaking change?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: