MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006330789 · doi:10.1177/23998083221082109

A longitudinal analysis of travel demand and its determinants in the Greater Toronto-Hamilton Area

2022· article· en· W3006330789 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dena Kasraian, Shivani Raghav, Bilal Yusuf, Eric J. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning B Urban Analytics and City Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersOntario Research Foundation
KeywordsVehicle miles of travelTransport engineeringTravel behaviorGeographyKilometerPopulationGravity model of tradeTravel timeEconomic geographyEconomicsEngineeringDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study provides a unique long-term investigation of regional travel demand that addresses several gaps in the existing longitudinal literature. Firstly, it investigates the development of travel demand in terms of both vehicle kilometres travelled (VKT) and passenger kilometres travelled (PKT), based on actual demand, congestion and equilibrium distances, using road and multi-modal transit networks in the Greater Toronto-Hamilton Area (GTHA). Secondly, it identifies influential travel demand determinants after testing an extensive set of variables including longitudinal gravity-based transport accessibility measures. Thirdly, it investigates to what extent the determinants’ influence changes over time and various locations within the study area, providing new insights into the temporal and intra-regional variations of travel demand and its determinants. The findings show that VKT and PKT have grown in absolute and per trip terms, mainly due to substantial population growth, especially in the suburban areas. Whilst average potential travel times by transit have decreased, they are substantially longer than auto travel times. Furthermore, travel demand determinants vary significantly across space by degrees of urbanity, especially for VKT. The findings call for area- and population segment-specific land use and transportation policies across the GTHA.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning B Urban Analytics and City ScienceSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207