MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139291664 · doi:10.3141/2034-13

Quantifying Technical Efficiency of Paratransit Systems by Data Envelopment Analysis Method

2007· article· en· W2139291664 on OpenAlexaffabout
Liping Fu, Jingtao Yang, Jeffrey M. Casello

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEfficiency Analysis Using DEA
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParatransitData envelopment analysisIdentification (biology)Regression analysisComputer scienceOperations researchQuality (philosophy)Level of servicePerformance measurementResource allocationTransport engineeringEfficiencyEngineeringPublic transportStatisticsBusinessMathematicsMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research evaluates efficiency levels of individual paratransit systems in Canada with the specific objective of identifying the most efficient agencies and the sources of their efficiency. Through identification of the most efficient systems along with the influencing factors, new service policies and management and operational strategies might be developed for improved resource utilization and quality of services. The research applies the data envelopment analysis methodology, which is a mathematical programming technique for determining the efficiency of individual systems as compared with their peers in multiple performance measures. Annual operating data from 2001 to 2003 as reported by the Canadian Urban Transit Association are used in this analysis. A bootstrap regression analysis is performed to identify the possible relationship between the efficiency of a paratransit system and measurable operating or managerial factors that affect the performance of paratransit systems. The regression analysis allows for the calculation of confidence intervals and bias for the efficiency scores.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.380
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 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

Citations32
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicEfficiency Analysis Using DEAFrench-language works237,207