-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 291
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. |
Hi, i am a colleague from @tobsesHub at raumobil. We are convinced, that forecasts are getting more important for sharing mobility services in the future as the technology to provide them is advancing fast. To be able to integrate them into standard software like the open trip planner, we suggest to extend GBFS with an optional file for forecasts as it makes a wider set of services possible, especially for intermodal trip planning. Right now, intermodal trips are practically just working with free floating sharing services for a first leg, as it is (mostly) not possible to reserve bikes or scooters. To give users an idea how probable a bike is there in like 2 hours we did a research prototype. Actually, the evaluation shows, that the feature is accepted very well. In talks with partners we also have the feeling that many poeple, providers and industry partners, are interested in such an extension. However, I like (to) KISS. So keeping the extension tight and clean is a good suggestion. I also think that weather is not needed here as it is used to calculate the probabilites, but not needed by the consumer anymore. I am open to present the research results on a different channel :) |
And, in addition, you're also implementing the use case of giving insight in the availability of scheduled vehicles (like cargo bikes or bikes at resorts). Although, I think that just a reference to a certain type of bikes is not enough in that case. It should (not must) be usable to reserve a bike for tomorrow afternoon with a child seat. That makes it a bit more complicated, but this might be a first step in that direction. And @sven4all: GBFS is heavily used in route planning software, where you normally plan in the future.
As described on MobilityData's website: |
Interested people, please note that we are currently discussing another topic, in which we may also be able to consider this topic. |
This discussion has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 30 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. |
keep open |
I will attend the mobility data summit in montreal looking forward to discuss the topic with you guys there! |
This discussion has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 30 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. |
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: