MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914986926 · doi:10.1177/0361198118825465

Exploring Service Usage and Activity Space Evolution in a Free-Floating Carsharing Service

2019· article· en· W2914986926 on OpenAlexafffund
Grzegorz Wielinski, Martin Trépanier, Catherine Morency

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTRIPS architectureService (business)Space (punctuation)BusinessComputer scienceFree spaceLiving spaceTelecommunicationsTransport engineeringMarketingDemographic economicsEngineeringEconomicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes to empirically investigate the members’ behaviors over time in a free-floating carsharing system. With a continuously evolving service in terms of service area and fleet size, member usage intensity and activity space are explored with passive data streams. Members are labeled according to their usage intensity for various periods of analysis. Results show an increase in higher usage intensity classes and a change in demographic composition of new members adopting the service over time: new members are younger and a parity between both genders is reached. Activity space investigation shows that members perform a fair share of their trips to return home and that ultra-frequency members seem to perform a substantial number of symmetric trips, meaning they are more inclined to use free-floating cars for commute-like trips. Interaction with the metro network is also investigated, with a proportion of members using free-floating carsharing to access stations. When looking at the activity space formed by members’ trip ends, users seem to constantly discover new portions of the service area. Multiple clusters of activity locations are determined for each member, with a recurrence level showing a fair amount of variability among members.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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