MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890856151

Bus Rapid Transit and Economic Development Case Study of the Eugene-Springfield, Oregon, BRT System

2012· article· en· W2890856151 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Arthur C. Nelson, Shyam Kannan, Bruce Appleyard, Matt Miller, Gail Meakins, Reid Ewing

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 91st Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaBus rapid transitRecreationQuarter (Canadian coin)Transport engineeringBusinessPublic transportRegional scienceGeographyEconomic growthEngineeringPolitical scienceEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bus rapid transit (BRT) in the United States is relatively recent. BRT has many promises, one of which is enhancing the economic development prospects of firms located along the route. Another is to improve overall metropolitan economic performance. In this article, the authors evaluate this issue with respect to one of the nation’s newest BRT systems that operates in a metropolitan area without rail transit: Eugene-Springfield, Oregon. Using a share analysis, the authors find that between 2004 and 2010, about 42 percent of all new jobs in the Eugene-Springfield urban area located within one-quarter mile of a BRT station. Using shift-share analysis, the authors find that BRT locations attracted about one-third of all new jobs. The analysis identifies those firms that are especially attracted to BRT locations, such as administrative and support, educational services, health care and social assistance, arts, entertainment and recreation, and accommodation. Planning and policy implications are offered.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.303 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Board 91st Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207