MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041729299 · doi:10.3141/2264-09

Modeling of Pedestrian Activity at Signalized Intersections: Land Use, Urban Form, Weather, and Spatiotemporal Patterns

2011· article· en· W2041729299 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Luis Miranda-Moreno, David Fernandes

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesU.S. Department of Transportation
KeywordsPedestrianDowntownIntersection (aeronautics)NoonGeographyEnvironmental scienceSample (material)Land useTransport engineeringStatisticsMeteorologyCartographyMathematicsAtmospheric sciencesEngineeringCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study evaluated the effects of land use, urban form patterns, and weather conditions on pedestrian activities. In this research, 8 h of daily manual pedestrian counts during the a.m. peak, noon, and p.m. peak periods were collected from a large sample of signalized intersections throughout Canada. The use of different model settings was attempted as part of a model sensitivity analysis. Results revealed that a 100% increase in population density or the amount of commercial space around intersections increased pedestrian flows by 22.7% to 37.1% and 10.7% to 11.7%, respectively. Moreover, the pedestrian activity at an intersection decreased as the distance from downtown increased (with an elasticity of 44%). Also, very warm weather (with temperatures >30°C) decreased pedestrian activity by up to 22%. This study was the first attempt to develop a spatiotemporal model of pedestrian activity in a large city. These results should be taken with caution, however, because the sample of intersections was not randomly selected. Moreover, the modeling techniques used in this research did not take into account the potential spatial correlation across intersections. This factor may have caused bias in parameter estimates. These issues are part of future work.

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 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)0.005
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations58
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207