MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163638079 · doi:10.3141/2276-14

Assessment of Potential Improvements to Metro–Bus Transfers in Bangkok, Thailand

2012· article· en· W2163638079 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransport engineeringTransfer (computing)Public transportTransit (satellite)EngineeringMetropolitan areaComputer scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rail rapid transit (metro) systems in Bangkok, Thailand, lack good intermodal connections. Actions that could improve connections between metros and buses are specified. More than 300 surveys were used to identify passenger perceptions of specific conditions of transfers between subway stations and buses. Passengers expressed high levels of dissatisfaction with specified conditions and the overall transfer experience; this finding suggests that intermodal metro–bus transfers could be greatly improved. The information was used to calibrate importance–satisfaction analysis and ordinal regression models. Model results suggest that the conditions that could have the greatest effect on the overall transfer experience are safety from crime and the distance between subway exits and bus stops.

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 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)0.010
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 score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.351 · 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