Measuring Changes in Multimodal Travel Behavior Resulting from Transport Supply Improvement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the desired transition toward sustainable and multimodal mobility, few tools have been developed either to quantify mode use diversity or to assess the effects of transportation system enhancements on multimodal travel behaviors. This paper attempts to fill this gap by proposing a methodology to appraise the causal impact of transport supply improvement on the evolution of multimodality levels between 2013 and 2018 in Montreal (Quebec, Canada). First, the participants of two household travel surveys were clustered into types of people (PeTys) to overcome the cross-sectional nature of the data. This allowed changes in travel behavior per type over a five-year period to be evaluated. A variant of the Dalton index was then applied on a series of aggregated (weighted) intensities of use of several modes to measure multimodality. Various sensitivity analyses were carried out to determine the parameters of this indicator (sensitivity to the least used modes, intensity metric, and mode independency). Finally, a difference-in-differences causal inference approach was explored to model the influence of the improvement of three alternative transport services (transit, bikesharing, and station-based carsharing) on the evolution of modal variability by type of people. The results revealed that, after controlling for different socio-demographic and spatial attributes, increasing transport supply had a significant and positive impact on multimodality. This outcome is therefore good news for the mobility of the future as alternative modes of transport emerge.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".