MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138990748 · doi:10.1051/e3sconf/202124408025

User interest in car sharing as an indicator of sustainable urban agglomeration development

2021· article· en· W3138990748 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Natalia Kireeva, Dmitry Zavyalov, Olga Saginova, Nadezhda Zavyalova, Ю.Л. Сагинов

Bibliographic record

VenueE3S Web of Conferences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSharing Economy and Platforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSharing economyUrban agglomerationThe InternetBusinessCar sharingPopulationService (business)Sustainable developmentWork (physics)MarketingGeographyEconomic geographyWorld Wide WebComputer scienceTransport engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of car sharing instead of owning a car minimises the negative impact of logistics activities on the urban environment. This research aims to show that sustainable development of densely populated cities is accompanied by an increase in Internet users’ interest in sharing services. The research of Internet users’ interest in car sharing services was based on Google Trends data on search queries originating from Russia, the United States and Canada over the past five years. In the course of this work, the hypothesis was confirmed that high user interest in car sharing is mainly observed in urban agglomerations with high population numbers and density, where the positive effects of car sharing are most noticeable. The paper emphasises the need to encourage the creation of new services in urban logistics, which will contribute to sustainable development and increase the competitiveness of cities. It also confirms the hypothesis that the growing interest of Internet users in the new service is accompanied by an increase in the market volume. User interest in established car sharing markets is at a stable level, except for the occurrence of significant events (e.g., the emergence of a new major player in the market) that stimulate an increase in interest.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE3S Web of ConferencesSame topicSharing Economy and PlatformsFrench-language works237,207