MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2751557127

Toward an Understanding of the Built Environment Influences on the Carpool Formation and Use Process: A Case Study of Employer-based Users within the Service Sector of Smart Commute’s Carpool Zone

2011· dissertation· en· W2751557127 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Randy Bui

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto MississaugaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsCarpoolTransport engineeringService (business)EngineeringPublic transportProcess (computing)OddsBusinessComputer scienceMarketing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent availability of geo-enabled web-based tools creates new possibilities for facilitating carpool formation. Carpool Zone is a web-based carpool formation service offered by Metrolinx, the transportation planning authority for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA), Canada. The carpooling literature has yet to uncover how different built environments may facilitate or act as barriers to carpool propensity. This research explores the relationship between the built environment and carpool formation. With respect to the built environment, industrial and business parks (homogeneous land-use mix) are associated with high odds of forming carpools. The results suggest that employer transport policies are also among the more salient factors influencing carpool formation and use. Importantly, the findings indicate that firms interested in promoting carpooling will require contingencies to reduce the uncertainty of ride provision that may hamper long-term carpool adoption by employees.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207