MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004131532 · doi:10.3141/2063-08

Enriching Archived Smart Card Transaction Data for Transit Demand Modeling

2008· article· en· W2004131532 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesPolytechnique Montréal
KeywordsSmart cardTRIPS architectureTransit (satellite)Public transportDatabase transactionComputer scienceTransaction dataTransport engineeringSmart cityTransfer (computing)Computer securityDatabaseEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transaction data from public transit smart cards represent a continuous stream of detailed travel information for transit demand modeling. Although certain aspects of information are incomplete in unprocessed data, efforts are devoted to deriving a more comprehensive understanding of the system and its users from partial information through data enrichment processes, with a long-term goal of establishing a dynamic model of demand. On the basis of previous work, methods are proposed to estimate the arrival time of bus runs at the stop level by using temporal constraints and to identify linked trips by using spatial–temporal concepts. These enrichments lead to the reconstruction of individual itineraries, the analysis of transfer activity, and the synthesis of vehicle load profiles. The latter provide planners with a detailed spatial–temporal progression of each run, origin and destination stops for each individual transaction, and boarding and alighting activity at each stop. The study draws on more than 37,000 smart card boarding transactions of an average weekday from a midsize transit agency. Results suggest that linked trips represent slightly above 10% of the total number of transactions in the network and the smart card system overestimates the proportion of linked trips by nearly 40%. The outcome is promising and lays a foundation to further enrich the itineraries by associating the boarding and alighting stops with trip generators, deriving trip purposes, and performing multiday analysis.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.247
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.188 · 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