Designing computable general equilibrium models for transportation applications
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a review of Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) model applications for spatial economic and transport interaction modelling. This paper has three objectives (1) To deliver an up to date and comprehensive literature review on applications of CGE models in transportation, (2) To analyze the different methodological approaches and their theoretical and practical advantages and disadvantages, and (3) To ultimately provide guidance on designing CGE models for various transportation analyses. The content of the paper is as follows: first, a brief introduction to CGE models is provided. The history of CGE models is traced, ranging from their origins and seminal applications in economics, to their eventual adoption in transportation research. This is followed by a comprehensive review of the application of CGE models to transport projects and policies. Various applications in transportation are reviewed in terms of their intended application, as well as their treatment of space and time. Finally, these applications are contrasted with respect to their methodological approaches, with a close examination of various influential model choices. Here, the essential design choices made within these model applications are explained and debated, to clearly elaborate on the workings of the models and the design choices facing CGE model developers.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it