MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W118617060

Hurontario/Main Street Corridor Master Plan Missisauga and Brampton - Building a New and Integrated Vision for the Corridor

2011· article· en· W118617060 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mark Powell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTransport and Economic Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlan (archaeology)Master planContext (archaeology)Transport engineeringTransit-oriented developmentLand useDevelopment planTransit (satellite)Key (lock)Bus rapid transitEnvironmental planningBusinessGeographyCivil engineeringEngineeringPublic transportComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mississauga has successfully grown to be Canada's 6th largest municipality and Brampton is Canada's 10th largest municipality. This paper will focus on the development of an integrated plan for transforming the Hurontario/Main Street Corridor, a major arterial road linking the Cities of Mississauga and Brampton within the Greater Toronto Area. Development of the plan has been built around partnerships, with the study undertaken by the two cities, working within the framework provided by the Province and Metrolinx the regional transportation authority. The plan has established a new vision for a street that is to be fundamentally sustainable - increasing the overall transportation capacity through the provision of rapid transit, being a focus of growth that supports vibrant, mixed use, transit oriented development, while being sensitive to the presence of adjacent stable neighbourhoods. Light Rail Transit (LRT) was selected to build upon an existing successful bus service already in place and one of the key catalysts for transforming land use along the corridor. This paper focuses on key challenges including replacing two existing traffic lanes with LRT, creating a corridor suitable for pedestrians and cyclists, and integration with the regional transit services along the corridor. Another key challenge will be to take a context sensitive approach to design that integrates well with the different land uses along the corridor. This paper will also discuss how both cities are building upon the recently approved LRT Master Plan for the corridor. For the covering abstract of this conference see record control number 201111RT334E.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.281
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.164 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTransport and Economic PoliciesFrench-language works237,207