Specialized urban transport for independently living elderly in Greater Vancouver
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adequate and appropriate means of mobility are essential for the psychological and physical well-being of elderly persons. Elderly persons who live in urban regions encounter barriers to their mobility which are unique to them as group. Physical, psychological, and financial factors interact with urban form and the organization of public transportation to constrain access to usual private and public modes of transportation. As a result, many of the urban elderly cannot walk, drive, ride as a passenger, or ride on public transportation to important destinations. The demand for transportation by the urban elderly will be influenced by the following trends: - the aging of urban populations, - the growth of the frail elderly (persons over 75 years of age), - de-institutionalization, - suburbanization, - improving health and income status of elderly persons. The continuation of these trends will challenge planners to design transportation systems which are effective and efficient, and at the same time satisfactory to the elderly. There are three types of possible solutions to the mobility problems of an increasing number of urban elderly persons: - land-use planning, - the design traffic systems to accommodate elderly drivers, - the design of public transportation systems. Planners do not have the necessary instruments to implement effective land use solutions. Accommodating an increase in the number of elderly drivers conflicts with social goals to increase public transportation use by all age groups. The thesis argues the most effective solutions for overcoming elderly mobility problems are based on the design of public transportation systems. There are two public transportation solutions for assisting elderly persons with mobility problems. The first is making conventional public transportation more accessible. The second is expanding specialized transportation which is the focus of this thesis. Three policy issues have dominated the history of specialized transportation in North America. The first policy issue is whether public resources for assisting the transportation handicapped should be allocated to accessible conventional public transportation, or allocated to expanding specialized transportation. This is a debate as to which public transportation solution is the most effective for overcoming elderly mobility problems. The other two policy issues relate specifically to the design of specialized transportation. The second policy issue is what level of centralization provides the most effective and satisfactory service. The third policy issue is what are the appropriate roles of the public, non-profit, and for-profit sectors in the management and delivery of service. A particular specialized transportation system can be described by how the three policy issues have been resolved in the urban region this system serves. A specialized transportation system can be evaluated by indicators of efficiency, effectiveness, and elderly satisfaction. These descriptive and evaluative indicators are used to examine and compare specialized transportation in Greater Vancouver, Metropolitan Toronto, and the City of Edmonton. Four recommendations, based on the comparative examination, are made as to how specialized transportation in Greater Vancouver can be made more effective, efficient, and satisfactory to the elderly. These recommendations are: - further allocations of public resources to assist the transportation handicapped should be directed at specialized transportation; - greater use of telecommunications and computer technology to increase the effectiveness of scheduling and dispatching trips; - implement a block grant program to assist in the establishment of community based transportation alternatives; - implement a user side subsidy program as soon as possible;
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".