MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2579160740

Unifying Long and Short Distance Personal Travel in a Statewide Planning Model

2016· article· en· W2579160740 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Stefan, Alan T Brownlee, John Douglas Hunt

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 95th Annual Meeting · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTravel behaviorTravel timeMicrosimulationConsistency (knowledge bases)Travel surveyTransport engineeringDuration (music)Key (lock)Computer scienceEconometricsGeographyEngineeringEconomicsArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A disaggregate behavioral tour-based microsimulation model was developed to forecast intrastate long-distance personal travel on a typical weekday as part of an overall statewide travel model system for all residents of California. A novel approach to what is traditionally described as travel generation was developed as a series of choice models focusing on consistency and integration with other components of the model system. Key features include the explicit integration of this long-distance personal travel model with the complementary short-distance personal travel model, the specification of a travel party size model for long-distance travel based on household size, and the development of models to represent characteristics of the long-distance travel tour, including duration of tour (number of nights), travel day status for a typical weekday, and time of travel within the weekday. The explicit trade-off between long- and short-distance travel produces appropriate sensitivities and reproduces the real...

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)0.002
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 score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 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 MeetingSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207