MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022354773 · doi:10.2495/sdp-v4-n1-18-34

Evaluation of a sustainable urban transport system through the use of the TRANSECON methodology

2009· article· en· W2022354773 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Planning and Valuation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainable developmentSustainabilityProcess (computing)Management scienceSet (abstract data type)Resource (disambiguation)Urban planningComputer scienceEnvironmental impact assessmentRisk analysis (engineering)Environmental economicsEngineeringEconomicsBusinessCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of 'sustainable development' is an achievement of policy as it introduces a new philosophy on matters regarding environmental protection and natural resource management. This paper begins by investigating the origin of the term 'sustainability' and the deeper social and economic causes of its emergence, through its historical evolution. The necessity for achieving sustainable development in the transport sector is pointed out and the policies which will lead to this objective are set forth. To the degree, however, that this concept alters our perceptions and introduces a new reasoning, this can result in a qualitative alteration of our analytic and synthetic planning tools. For instance, revision of the assessment criteria and the addition of new social and environmental parameters led to the creation of new methods and techniques of evaluation, capable of incorporating the new data. However, the process through which the assessment and the calculation of parameters is realised is evaluation; therefore, this change in the way of assessment essentially lies in the differentiation in the approaches and the evaluation criteria. The traditional evaluation with purely economic (quantitative) criteria has been replaced (or at least supplemented) by more integrated evaluation techniques (multicriteria and socio-economic analyses) that take into account both quantitative and qualitative criteria. The multicriteria evaluation methodology, which resulted from the TRANSECON (Urban Transport and Socio-economic Development) Project, is used in this paper, in order to evaluate an investment of the Public Transport Operator of Thessaloniki concerning its network expansion. The paper aims at the examination of two things; firstly the possibility of adapting and applying the TRANSECON methodology to this specific investment pointing out the essential assumptions and secondly to examine how a non-viable investment in economic terms can contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. Copyright © 2009 WIT Press.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.197 · 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