MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971428932 · doi:10.33017/reveciperu2007.0004/

LOS DESAFÍOS CONFRONTADOS POR LOS PROYECTOS CONVENCIONALES DE TRANSPORTE Y EL POTENCIAL DE LOS SISTEMAS INTELIGENTES DE TRANSPORTE PARA UNA CIUDAD EN DESARROLLO, LIMA, PERÚ

2019· article· es· W2971428932 on OpenAlexaff
Manuel Martínez

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista ECIPeru · 2019
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBusiness, Innovation, and Economy
Canadian institutionsMinistère des Transports
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBusinessTransport engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

LOS DESAFÍOS CONFRONTADOS POR LOS PROYECTOS CONVENCIONALES DE TRANSPORTE Y EL POTENCIAL DE LOS SISTEMAS INTELIGENTES DE TRANSPORTE PARA UNA CIUDAD EN DESARROLLO, LIMA, PERÚ CHALLENGES TO CONVENTIONAL TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS AND THE POTENTIAL FOR INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS IN A DEVELOPING CITY, LIMA, PERU Manuel J. Martíneza DOI: https://doi.org/10.33017/RevECIPeru2007.0004/ RESUMEN Este artículo examina los desafíos que encuentran los proyectos convencionales de transporte urbano cuando se implementan durante el proceso de motorización de Lima. Como solución potencial, se recomienda que se priorice la investigación y desarrollo de los Sistemas Inteligentes de Transporte para Lima. Palabras clave: Sistemas Inteligentes de Transporte, Telecomunicaciones, Transporte Urbano, Política de Transporte Urbano. ABSTRACT This paper presents the challenges to the implementation of conventional transportation projects in developing cities with motorization process and recommends research in Intelligent Transportation Systems. Keywords: Intelligent Transportation Systems, Telecommunications, Urban Transportation, Urban Transportation Policy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista ECIPeruSame topicBusiness, Innovation, and EconomyFrench-language works237,207