MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1879825720 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2014-0202

Merging transit schedule information with a planning network to perform dynamic multimodal assignment: lessons from a case study of the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area

2014· article· en· W1879825720 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Adam Weiss, Mohamed S. Mahmoud, Peter Kucirek, Khandker Nurul Habib

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceComplement (music)Aggregate (composite)ScheduleMultimodal transportOperations researchTransport engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traffic assignment has traditionally been performed using aggregate static user equilibrium approaches for a single mode. These approaches are typically favoured over more complex dynamic multimodal micro and meso-simulated models. Investigations into dynamic multimodal assignment models have shown promise, prompting interest in the adoption of complex modelling structures. The development and operation of these complex models can still be problematic, highlighting the need for efficient approaches to allow practitioners to acquire and apply these models. This paper presents a method to modify existing static auto assignment networks for dynamic multimodal assignment. To complement this, a method, which improves the overall performance of the transit routing procedure used within many assignment models, is presented. These methods were tested using data from the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area, and result in an assignment procedure with reasonable run time and results, suggesting potential for wide spread adoption of these approaches.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering→Same topicTransportation Planning and Optimization→French-language works237,207→