MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965106804 · doi:10.1080/03081060500322599

A Trip Reconstruction Tool for GPS-based Personal Travel Surveys

2005· article· en· W1965106804 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eui-Hwan Chung, Amer Shalaby

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Planning and Technology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobal Positioning SystemTransport engineeringTRIPS architectureMap matchingModalMatching (statistics)Travel surveyRespondentComputer scienceDowntownTravel behaviorSoftwareGeographyEngineeringTelecommunicationsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reports on the development of a trip reconstruction software tool for use in GPS-based personal travel surveys. Specifically, the tool enables the automatic processing of GPS traces of individual survey respondents in order to identify the road links traveled and modes used by each respondent for individual trips. Identifying the links is based on a conventional GIS-based map-matching algorithm and identifying the modes is a rule-based algorithm using attributes of four modes (walk, bicycle, bus and passenger-car). The tool was evaluated using GPS travel data collected for the study and a multi-modal transportation network model of downtown Toronto. The results show that the tool correctly detected about 79% of all links traveled and 92% of all trip modes.

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)0.016
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations160
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Planning and TechnologySame topicHuman Mobility and Location-Based AnalysisFrench-language works237,207