MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048707102 · doi:10.1061/9780784482933.368

A Study of Airport Access Mode Choice Behavior Based on a Nest Logit Model

2020· article· en· W3048707102 on OpenAlexaff
Yuyao Bai, Shaozhi Hong, Xintian Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueCICTP 2020 · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicAviation Industry Analysis and Trends
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMode (computer interface)Logistic regressionNest (protein structural motif)LogitMixed logitComputer scienceMode choiceNested logitStatisticsEconometricsTransport engineeringMathematicsMachine learningEngineeringHuman–computer interactionPublic transportBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper uses nest logit model to analyze the travel behavior data of passengers at Pudong Airport. This study classifies the travel mode, occupations and travel purposes. Our modeling outcomes show that: (1) women are more likely to choose self-driving than men, which is different from the existing literature; (2) the passengers who go to the airport in the morning have the highest probability of choosing a taxi, especially before 9 o’clock; (3) the higher the bus accessibility, the lower the possibility of choosing airport bus; and (4) taxis should also be listed in private transportation besides car passenger and self-driving. In addition, an interesting new variable has been found. Data acquisition time can be used for model analysis. The moment when questionnaire is to be filled is recorded in the system, which to be found has great contributions to model.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.136 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCICTP 2020Same topicAviation Industry Analysis and TrendsFrench-language works237,207