{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01584786053882726, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004754358161648178, 'mean_word_length': 4.9575471698113205, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Comparison of Departure Time of Day Formulations

Airline passengers’ itinerary choices are influenced by many factors including carriers, prices, the number of connections, and departure times. This paper compares three different methods that have been used to model departure time of day preferences. The first is a discrete formulation that uses indicator variables to represent the hour of departure. The next two methods are based on a continuous formulation that uses a series of sine and cosine functions. One assumes departure time preferences over a 24-hour cycle and the other uses shorter cycle lengths that account for fewer departures during certain hours of the day. We compare models using itineraries in the Continental U.S. that are separated by two time zones. Although the discrete formulation fits the data better, the two continuous time of day formulations are preferred as they provide more intuitive predictions and require fewer parameters. Results between the two continuous time of day formulations are similar but differ in how strongly they weight itineraries that depart very early or very late in the day. Based on empirical results, we recommend testing both 24-hour and less than 24-hour cycle lengths for a particular dataset.