MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313872203

Toward a More Meterless Parking System: User Demographic Factors Influencing Adoption and Usage of Pay by Cell (PBC) Services in Washington, DC

2016· article· en· W2313872203 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Benito O. Pérez, Soumya S Dey, Yi‐Wei Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 95th Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Parking Systems Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographicsOutreachRevenueBusinessMarketingQuarter (Canadian coin)ChinatownAdvertisingFinanceGeographyEconomicsEconomic growth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The District Department of Transportation’s (DDOT) pay by cell (PBC) program for on-street parking has been very successful. Since its launch in July 2011, the program has attracted one million customers, accounting for approximately 10 million transactions and 55 percent of DC’s parking revenues. The operational and maintenance cost of the program is significantly lower than other means of paying for parking, such as coins and credit cards. The program also enjoys a high level of customer satisfaction. DC’s high adoption rates afford DDOT the opportunity to look at meterless parking. DC will be experimenting with removing meters from one side of the street as part of the parkDC: Chinatown/Penn Quarter project. However, for this concept to gain citywide acceptance, the pay by cell program needs to cater to the needs of all customers that park in the District. This paper analyzes the characteristics of customers that use the current pay by cell program; draws inferences about common traits of PBC users and their usage of the PBC system; and starts framing an understanding on the demographics of PBC non-users. Identifying the general demographics of non-users will enable DDOT to develop outreach strategies that encourage adoption of the PBC program by all parkers.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.271 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Board 95th Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardSame topicSmart Parking Systems ResearchFrench-language works237,207