Share or Solo? Individual and Social Choices in Ride-Hailing

IF 0.1 4区 工程技术 Q4 ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING
Ming Hu, Jianfu Wang, Hengda Wen
{"title":"Share or Solo? Individual and Social Choices in Ride-Hailing","authors":"Ming Hu, Jianfu Wang, Hengda Wen","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3675050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ride-hailing platforms offer riders pooling service to share rides with other riders. On the one hand, pooling service mitigates congestion and decreases rider wait times in rush hours, and sharing riders benefit from reduced prices. On the other hand, sharing riders may compromise on privacy and space when riding with strangers, and may take more time to reach their destinations. We derive a queueing model that considers solo ride and shared ride together, where riders are strategic in choosing which ride to participate. We analyze and compare the decentralized rider decisions and the centralized social planner decisions. In most cases, a smaller fraction of riders choose shared rides compared to that under the socially optimal decision, which we call under-share. Nonetheless, riders can always be induced to choose the socially optimal strategy in equilibrium under a proper monetary, social, or priority scheme. Interestingly, under the priority scheme, overshare can happen, whereas without the priority scheme the decentralized riders behave social-optimally in the same arrival rate and sharing externality range. In contrast to that individual riders always over-join an unobservable M/M/1 queue (compared to the social optimal), riders always under-join the queue in our model with an additional ride-sharing option. Moreover, the social planner may restrict the number of riders even if the arrival rate is below the socially optimal one. This is because social welfare may be a bimodal function of the arrival rate under the assumption that all riders join. At last, we conduct a numerical study with the ride-hailing data of Chicago, and discover that though under-share occurs in residential areas during morning rush hours and in downtown during evening rush hours, the observed sharing fractions are very close to the optimal ones. Over-share occurs during the same time interval but in the opposite areas.","PeriodicalId":49886,"journal":{"name":"Manufacturing Engineering","volume":"63 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Manufacturing Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3675050","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Ride-hailing platforms offer riders pooling service to share rides with other riders. On the one hand, pooling service mitigates congestion and decreases rider wait times in rush hours, and sharing riders benefit from reduced prices. On the other hand, sharing riders may compromise on privacy and space when riding with strangers, and may take more time to reach their destinations. We derive a queueing model that considers solo ride and shared ride together, where riders are strategic in choosing which ride to participate. We analyze and compare the decentralized rider decisions and the centralized social planner decisions. In most cases, a smaller fraction of riders choose shared rides compared to that under the socially optimal decision, which we call under-share. Nonetheless, riders can always be induced to choose the socially optimal strategy in equilibrium under a proper monetary, social, or priority scheme. Interestingly, under the priority scheme, overshare can happen, whereas without the priority scheme the decentralized riders behave social-optimally in the same arrival rate and sharing externality range. In contrast to that individual riders always over-join an unobservable M/M/1 queue (compared to the social optimal), riders always under-join the queue in our model with an additional ride-sharing option. Moreover, the social planner may restrict the number of riders even if the arrival rate is below the socially optimal one. This is because social welfare may be a bimodal function of the arrival rate under the assumption that all riders join. At last, we conduct a numerical study with the ride-hailing data of Chicago, and discover that though under-share occurs in residential areas during morning rush hours and in downtown during evening rush hours, the observed sharing fractions are very close to the optimal ones. Over-share occurs during the same time interval but in the opposite areas.
分享还是单干?网约车中的个人和社会选择
网约车平台提供拼车服务,让乘客与其他乘客共乘。一方面,拼车服务缓解了交通拥堵,减少了高峰时段乘客的等待时间,而拼车服务则受益于价格的降低。另一方面,与陌生人共乘可能会损害隐私和空间,并且可能需要更多时间才能到达目的地。我们推导了一个考虑单独乘车和共享乘车的排队模型,其中乘客在选择参加哪个乘车时是有策略的。我们分析和比较了分散的骑手决策和集中的社会规划师决策。在大多数情况下,与社会最优决策相比,选择共享出行的乘客比例更小,我们称之为“共享不足”。尽管如此,在适当的货币、社会或优先方案下,乘客总是可以被诱导选择均衡中的社会最优策略。有趣的是,在优先方案下,可能会发生过度共享,而在没有优先方案的情况下,分散的乘客在相同的到达率和共享外部性范围内表现出社会最优。与个体乘客总是过度加入一个不可观察的M/M/1队列(与社会最优相比)相反,在我们的模型中,乘客总是加入一个额外的乘车共享选项的队列。此外,即使到达率低于社会最优,社会规划者也可能限制乘客的数量。这是因为在所有乘客都加入的假设下,社会福利可能是到达率的双峰函数。最后,我们用芝加哥的网约车数据进行了数值研究,发现尽管早高峰时期住宅区和晚高峰时期市中心出现了共享不足,但观察到的共享分数非常接近最优分数。过度分享发生在相同的时间间隔,但在相反的区域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Manufacturing Engineering
Manufacturing Engineering 工程技术-工程:制造
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信