A GIS‐based method to identify cost‐effective routes for rural deviated fixed route transit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Deviated fixed route transit (DFRT) service connecting rural and urban areas is a growing transportation mode in the USA. Little research has been done to develop frameworks for route design. A methodology to explore the most cost‐effective DFRT route is presented in this paper. The inputs include potential DFRT demand distribution and a road network. A heuristic is used to build possible routes by starting at urban cores and extending in all network directions in certain length increments. All the DFRT routes falling in the length range desired by the users are selected. The cost effectiveness of those routes, defined by operating cost per passenger trip, is compared. The most cost‐effective route is selected and presented in a GIS map. A case study illustrates the methodology in several Tennessee metropolitan regions. The most cost‐effective route length is case specific; some routes (e.g. those out of our Nashville case) are most cost effective when short, while others (e.g. those out of Memphis) are most cost effective when long. Government agencies could use the method to identify routes with the lowest operating cost per passenger given a route length or an operating cost budget. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".