MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1547534503 · doi:10.1002/atr.201

Bayesian imputation of non‐chosen attribute values in revealed preference surveys

2012· article· en· W1547534503 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Simon Washington, Srinath Ravulaparthy, John M. Rose, David A. Hensher, Ram M. Pendyala

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultinomial logistic regressionEconometricsImputation (statistics)StatisticsBayesian probabilityComputer scienceMultinomial probitSample (material)ReplicateCalibrationData miningMathematicsMissing data

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Obtaining attribute values of non‐chosen alternatives in a revealed preference context is challenging because non‐chosen alternative attributes are unobserved by choosers, chooser perceptions of attribute values may not reflect reality, existing methods for imputing these values suffer from shortcomings, and obtaining non‐chosen attribute values is resource intensive. This paper presents a unique Bayesian (multiple) Imputation Multinomial Logit model that imputes unobserved travel times and distances of non‐chosen travel modes based on random draws from the conditional posterior distribution of missing values. The calibrated Bayesian (multiple) Imputation Multinomial Logit model imputes non‐chosen time and distance values that convincingly replicate observed choice behavior. Although network skims were used for calibration, more realistic data such as supplemental geographically referenced surveys or stated preference data may be preferred. The model is ideally suited for imputing variation in intrazonal non‐chosen mode attributes and for assessing the marginal impacts of travel policies, programs, or prices within traffic analysis zones. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.128
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.128
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207