The usage of location based big data and trip planning services for the estimation of a long-distance travel demand model. Predicting the impacts of a new high speed rail corridor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Travel demand models are a useful tool to assess transportation projects. Within travel demand, long-distance trips represent a significant amount of the total vehicle-kilometers travelled, in contrast to commuting trips. Consequently, they pay a relevant role in the economic, social and environmental impacts of transportation. This paper describes the development of a microscopic long-distance travel demand model for the Province of Ontario (Canada) and analyzes the sensitivity to the implementation of a new high speed rail corridor. Trip generation, destination choice and mode choice models were developed for this research. Multinomial logit models were estimated and calibrated using the Travel Survey for Residents in Canada (TSRC). It was complemented with location-based social network data from Foursquare, improving the description of activities and diverse land uses at the destinations. Level of service of the transit network was defined by downloading trip time, frequency and fare using the planning service Rome2rio. New scenarios were generated to simulate the impacts of a new high speed rail corridor by varying rail travel times, frequencies and fares of the rail services. As a result, a significant increase of rail modal shares was measured, directly proportional to speed and frequency and inversely proportional to price.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".