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 OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yafeng Yin, William H. K. Lam, Mark A. Miller

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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

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
GenreMethods

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

Citations46
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207