Consultation sur les déplacements à vélo à Québec 2015 — Recommandations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"Pour réaliser sa vision d’une ville attirante et durable, la Ville de Québec désire promouvoir le vélo comme un mode de transport utilitaire pour en encourager la pratique. Le groupe Transportation Research at McGill (TRAM) a ainsi mené pour la Ville un sondage auprès de cyclistes de Québec durant l’automne 2015. Les objectifs de ce sondage étaient : • D’obtenir des informations sur les habitudes, les préférences, l’historique et la démographie des cyclistes utilitaires; • De définir le profil des cyclistes à but récréatif, et de comprendre leurs raisons pour ne pas se déplacer en vélo à des fins utilitaires; • De comprendre comment il serait possible d’encourager les cyclistes à but récréatif et les non-cyclistes à se déplacer plus souvent en vélo; • D’offrir des recommandations pour promouvoir la pratique du vélo utilitaire."@eng
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 | 0.009 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.005 |
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".