atlas

Research map / Reinforcement learning / Visual and representation RL

GARLIC: GPT-Augmented Reinforcement Learning with Intelligent Control for Vehicle Dispatching

AAAI 2025 · Reinforcement learning › Visual and representation RL · approach: RL for combinatorial routing · 3 citations (OpenAlex)

Read the paperCheck your idea against 108,967 papers

AI-extracted summary. Written by AI from the paper's full text. Numbers and claims can be wrong or missing context, so check the paper before you cite or build on it.

Proposes GARLIC, a GPT-2-augmented multi-agent RL vehicle dispatching framework that uses multiview GCN graphs for hierarchical traffic states, a GRU-based dynamic driver-behavior reward, and a custom GeoLoss, evaluated on Manhattan and Hangzhou taxi data in SUMO.

Problem

Vehicle dispatching for online ride-hailing must handle limited local observability, multi-granularity traffic dynamics, and diverse driver behaviors while reducing empty-loaded travel.

Approach

Combines multiview honeycomb-grid GCN traffic representations (micro/meso/macro with limited V2V hops), a GRU contrastively trained driver-behavior probability folded into a fare-weighted dynamic reward, and a GPT-2 decision-transformer-style policy trained with a circular-angle-aware GeoLoss.

Key results

Measured effects reported in the paper

What was changedWhereMeasuredEffect
Multiview graph (micro+meso+macro, diameters 2+5+10 km) vs single-view graphs (ablation)GARLIC · Manhattan/Hangzhou ablationscheduling errorHelped
Driving behavior weight alpha (higher weight on driver behavior vs. fare) (ablation)GARLIC · Hangzhou ablationtrajectory errorHelped
Dynamic reward (driving behavior + fare) vs. imitation learning baseline using traffic states only (ablation)GARLIC · IL comparisontrajectory errorHelped
Custom GeoLoss vs. standard lossesGARLIC · Manhattan and Hangzhou overallError (km)Helped
Dynamic behavior-aware reward and GPT policy vs. best baseline on HangzhouGARLIC · HangzhouError (km): 0.1582 vs 0.1843 (SS-DT)Helped
Full GARLIC vs. SS-DT on empty-loaded rateGARLIC · ManhattanEmpty-loaded rate (%): 32.38 vs 32.25 (SS-DT)Hurt
Offline RL methods (TD3+BC, CQL, RLPD) vs. larger Hangzhou datasetconventional offline RL baselines · HangzhouError (km)Hurt

Surprising findings

Limitations

Experimental setup

Datasets: NYC 2018 Yellow Taxi Trip Data (Manhattan) Hangzhou taxi trajectory data (private)

Benchmarks: Manhattan (NYC taxi) simulation Hangzhou taxi simulation

Metrics: Error (km) Empty-loaded rate (%)

Baselines: MT FTPEDEL CQL TD3+BC Decision Transformer RLPD Latent offline RL SS-DT DGS A-RTRS

Builds on: Decision Transformer TD3+BC Conservative Q-Learning SS-DT

Closest papers by meaning

Writing a paper in this area? scime draft is a free LaTeX editor with AI included, real-time co-authors and a check of your references and venue rules before you submit. It also imports OpenAI Prism projects.

Open scime draft

Get the next scime Dispatch and a monthly field update

Free. We send a confirmation link first; every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Privacy