MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026964874 · doi:10.1002/atr.5670380104

A simulation‐based reliability assessment approach for congested transit network

2004· article· en· W2026964874 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

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHong Kong Polytechnic University
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Transit (satellite)ScheduleComputer scienceReliability engineeringMonte Carlo methodTransport engineeringService (business)Bus rapid transitLevel of servicePublic transportSimulationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper is an attempt to develop a generic simulation‐based approach to assess transit service reliability, taking into account interaction between network performance and passengers' route choice behaviour. Three types of reliability, say, system wide travel time reliability, schedule reliability and direct boarding waiting‐time reliability are defined from perspectives of the community or transit administration, the operator and passengers. A Monte Carlo simulation approach with a stochastic user equilibrium transit assignment model embedded is proposed to quantify these three reliability measures of transit service. A simple transit network with a bus rapid transit (BRT) corridor is analysed as a case study where the impacts of BRT components on transit service reliability are evaluated preliminarily.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.850
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.308 · 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