MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2372236441

Influencing Factors of City Bus Service Quality Based on SERVPERF Model

2013· article· en· W2372236441 on OpenAlexaff
Chen Yu-ting

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Dimension (graph theory)Service qualityService (business)EmpathyPerceptionScale (ratio)Quality (philosophy)BusinessTransport engineeringComputer scienceMarketingPsychologyEngineeringMathematicsSocial psychologyGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To identify the influencing factors and action mechanism of urban bus service level systematically,this paper develops the five dimensions perception scale model for the city bus passenger from tangibles based on the SERVPERF analysis.The five perception scale include:tangibles,assurance,reliability,responsiveness and empathy.By analyzing the data from passenger questionnaires,it is found that the reliability dimension is the highest to the overall quality of service that bus passengers perceive,and the responsive dimension is the lowest.Furthermore,the tangible dimension is strongly correlated with the assurance and reliability dimension.The results show that it is necessary to strengthen the reliability management of city bus service and to raise the awareness of service of related staff.Meanwhile,it is also useful to improve the bus image and encourage the humane measures,which will exert positive impact on promoting service perception of passengers.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information TechnologySame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207