论文标题

及时意识到的现场计划方法

Timeliness-aware On-site Planning Method for Tour Navigation

论文作者

Isoda, S., Hidaka, M., Matsuda, Y., Suwa, H., Yasumoto, K.

论文摘要

近年来,人们对提供现场个性化旅游现场建议的旅行应用程序越来越感兴趣。尽管通常有帮助,但大多数可用的选项都仅基于关注地点的静态信息提供选择,而无需考虑天气,一天中的时间和拥堵等动态因素,并着重于帮助游客决定下一步访问什么地方。这种限制可能会阻止访客优化使用有限的资源(即时间和金钱)的使用。一些现有的研究使用户可以提前计算一次半理想的游览访问,但是由于较大的计算时间,不考虑动态因素等,他们的现场使用很困难。为了应对这种情况,我们与下一部分的静态旅游信息进行了三个组成部分:与下一位访问的次数访问,并访问的一些静态旅游信息,并访问下一段时间,并访问了次数,并访问了一项访问,并访问了一项访问,并访问了综合的信息。被访问。确定产生最佳总体巡回赛得分的旅游路线是NP硬性问题,我们建议在贪婪方法上提出三种算法。为了验证提出的方法的实用性,我们将三种算法应用于日本京都的Higashiyama兴趣20点,并确认输出解决方案优于京都的模型途径,计算时间的三种算法的计算时间为1.9美元\ pm0.1 $,PM0.1 $,2.0美元,$ 2.0 \ pm0.1 $ 27.0.0.8.8 $ 27.0.0.8.8.8 $ 27.0.8 $ 27.0.0.0.8.8.8.8.8.8.8.8 $ s。

In recent years, there has been a growing interest in travel applications that provide on-site personalized tourist spot recommendations. While generally helpful, most available options offer choices based solely on static information on places of interest without consideration of such dynamic factors as weather, time of day, and congestion, and with a focus on helping the tourist decide what single spot to visit next. Such limitations may prevent visitors from optimizing the use of their limited resources (i.e., time and money). Some existing studies allow users to calculate a semi-optimal tour visiting multiple spots in advance, but their on-site use is difficult due to the large computation time, no consideration of dynamic factors, etc. To deal with this situation, we formulate a tour score approach with three components: static tourist information on the next spot to visit, dynamic tourist information on the next spot to visit, and an aggregate measure of satisfaction associated with visiting the next spot and the set of subsequent spots to be visited. Determining the tour route that produces the best overall tour score is an NP-hard problem for which we propose three algorithms on the greedy method. To validate the usefulness of the proposed approach, we applied the three algorithms to 20 points of interest in Higashiyama, Kyoto, Japan, and confirmed that the output solution was superior to the model route for Kyoto, with computation times of the three algorithms of $1.9\pm0.1$, $2.0\pm0.1$, and $27.0\pm1.8$ s.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源