Hybrid Choice Modeling of New Technologies for Car Choice in Canada
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the past decade, a new trend in discrete choice modeling has emerged: psychological factors are explicitly incorporated to enhance the behavioral representation of the choice process. In this context, hybrid models expand on standard choice models by including attitudes and perceptions as latent variables. The complete model is composed of a group of structural equations describing the latent variables in terms of observable exogenous variables and a group of measurement relationships linking latent variables to certain observable indicators. Although the estimation of hybrid models requires the evaluation of complex multidimensional integrals, simulated maximum likelihood is implemented to solve the integrated multiple-equation model. This study empirically evaluates the application of hybrid choice modeling to data from a survey conducted by the Energy and Materials Research Group (Simon Fraser University, 2002 and 2003) of the virtual personal vehicle choices made by Canadian consumers when they are faced with technological innovations. The survey also includes a complete list of indicators that allows the application of a hybrid choice model formulation. It is concluded that the hybrid choice model is genuinely capable of adapting to practical situations by including latent variables among the set of explanatory variables. The incorporation of perceptions and attitudes in this way leads to more realistic models and gives a better description of the profile of consumers and their adoption of new automobile technologies.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it