MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2968641664 · doi:10.1155/2019/8198346

Modeling and Analysis of Ticketing Channel Choice for Intercity Bus Passengers: A Case Study in Beijing, China

2019· article· en· W2968641664 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jun Li, Shunping Jia, Sijia Zhang, Yuqiong Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBeijingMultinomial logistic regressionStructural equation modelingTransport engineeringMode choiceMixed logitLatent variableChannel (broadcasting)Discrete choiceChinaPreferenceSocioeconomic statusComputer scienceLogistic regressionEconometricsEngineeringPublic transportTelecommunicationsGeographyEconomicsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Buses represent the main mode for intercity passenger transportation in China. In recent years, a multichannel ticketing strategy has been widely employed in the bus passenger transportation industry. However, the mechanisms and key drivers of the channels through which bus passengers purchase tickets are underexplored. Thus, the aim of this study is to empirically apply an integrated choice and latent variable (ICLV) approach to analyze ticketing channel choice behavior and the heterogeneous preferences of bus passengers. The variables incorporated in the model include the socioeconomic characteristics of passengers, trip attributes, and latent attitudes with 12 ordinal indicators. Based on the data of 1800 participants collected from the city of Beijing, China, this study develops a ticketing channel choice ICLV model merging a discrete choice model with a structural equation model. The key factors that affect the channel preference are further discussed through a comparison with a conventional multinomial logit (MNL) model. The results reveal that the three attitudinal variables have a significant influence on ticketing channel choice. Furthermore, this study indicates that perceptual differences exist due to various socioeconomic and trip characteristics. Personal privacy is a major obstacle that prevents passengers from choosing online channels, especially for older passengers and those with lower education.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score0.942

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.306 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207