Access Walking Distance, Transit Use, and Transit-Oriented Development in North York City Center, Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study had two main objectives: to examine how variations in walking distance to rapid transit are related to mode choice as well as to auto ownership and use and to investigate whether temporal changes in the built environment associated transit-oriented development in close proximity to rapid transit (subway) service encourage residents to use transit. The city of Toronto, Canada, and one of the fastest-growing suburban centers of Toronto–-the North York City Center located near the northern edge of Toronto on the Yonge subway line–-were selected as case studies. With the 2001 Transportation Tomorrow Survey (TTS) data, a quantitative analysis was employed; it that focused on home-based trips by using the city's subway network to demonstrate how walk-access distances to rapid transit are related to subway mode share, auto ownership, and auto use. Further analysis was undertaken to examine the temporal changes in land use and related travel behavior over a 15-year period by comparing TTS data for 1986 and 2001. The results of the analyses illustrate quantitatively the strong association between convenient walk access, lifestyle, and transit use, not only during peak hours but also throughout the day. The results show how the promotion of focused development within a convenient walking distance of rapid transit service in a relatively low-density suburb of Toronto has, over 15 years, been accompanied by a substantial shift in residents’ travel behavior toward increased transit use.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".