MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753257100 · doi:10.3141/2658-01

Modeling the Demand for New Transportation Services and Technologies

2017· article· en· W2753257100 on OpenAlexaff
Eric J. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrosimulationExploitScope (computer science)Computer scienceField (mathematics)Demand forecastingBig dataData scienceSoftwareOperations researchTransport engineeringEngineeringComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper briefly discusses the current state of the art of urban travel demand modeling and research needs in the field. Special emphasis is given to both the challenges and the opportunities posed by modern information technology and the data, transportation services, and travel behaviors that this technology is generating. Travel demand modeling has made very significant strides over the past 20 years, especially in the development of operational activity- and tour-based regional travel demand forecasting systems. These model systems represent first-generation agent-based microsimulation models. Considerable need, opportunity, and scope exist for the development of significantly more powerful second-generation agent-based microsimulation models that build upon emerging big data sets (among other information sources) and high-performance computing. This task, however, will involve the development of new behavioral representations and computational algorithms implemented within much more flexible software environments that both fully exploit available computing power and enable flexible experimentation with and extension of representations of new transportation modes and services and evolving travel behavior.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.127
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207