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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.264
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.006

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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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