Main Article Content
Real-time ridesharing systems such as UberPool, Lyft Line and GrabShare have become hugely popular as they reduce the costs for customers, improve per trip revenue for drivers and reduce traffic on the roads by grouping customers with similar itineraries. The key challenge in these systems is to group the “right” requests to travel together in the “right” available vehicles in real-time, so that the objective (e.g., requests served, revenue or delay) is optimized. This challenge has been addressed in existing work by: (i) generating as many relevant feasible combinations of requests (with respect to the available delay for customers) as possible in real-time; and then (ii) optimizing assignment of the feasible request combinations to vehicles. Since the number of request combinations increases exponentially with the increase in vehicle capacity and number of requests, unfortunately, such approaches have to employ ad hoc heuristics to identify a subset of request combinations for assignment.
Our key contribution is in developing approaches that employ zone (abstraction of individual locations) paths instead of request combinations. Zone paths allow for generation of significantly more “relevant” combinations (in comparison to ad hoc heuristics) in real-time than competing approaches due to two reasons: (i) Each zone path can typically represent multiple request combinations; (ii) Zone paths are generated using a combination of offline and online methods. Specifically, we contribute both myopic (ridesharing assignment focussed on current requests only) and non-myopic (ridesharing assignment considers impact on expected future requests) approaches that employ zone paths. In our experimental results, we demonstrate that our myopic approach outperforms the current best myopic approach for ridesharing on both real-world and synthetic datasets (with respect to both objective and runtime). We also show that our non-myopic approach obtains 14.7% improvement over existing myopic approach. Our non-myopic approach gets improvements of up to 12.48% over a recent non-myopic approach, NeurADP. Even when NeurADP is allowed to optimize learning over test settings, results largely remain comparable except in a couple of cases, where NeurADP performs better.