MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200211542 · doi:10.1016/j.trip.2021.100522

Integrating COVID-19 health risks into crowding costs for transit schedule planning

2021· article· en· W4200211542 on OpenAlexafffund
Kaushan W. Devasurendra, Saeid Saidi, S. C. Wirasinghe, Lina Kattan

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPublic transportPandemicCrowdingContext (archaeology)HeadwayTransport engineeringTransit (satellite)Computer scienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)BusinessOperations researchEngineeringGeographyMedicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The public transport sector worldwide experienced the worst impact in recent history, in terms of ridership loss, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic negatively affected passengers' perceptions of public transport and is likely to make a lasting impact on ridership, trip patterns, and modal share. Without any supportive changes to transit operations, ridership is likely to decline. This study explores the setting of frequencies in transit lines and proposes a two-part methodology that addresses the changing perceptions of users, especially in a health-related context. The first part develops a mathematical model that expresses the pre-COVID-19 cost of passenger crowding as an integral part of user costs to determine the optimal headway that considers the trade-offs between user and operator costs. A continuum approximation for the demand of the bus line has been used in the derivation. The second part extends the developed model to include both the costs of the health risks associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and crowding. The developed models will help transit planners and operators to plan and adapt operations to changing health risks during the pandemic and post-pandemic. Several numerical examples are provided to describe the uses and applications of the analytical models using information obtained from the literature.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.227
GPT teacher head0.563
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Interdisciplinary PerspectivesSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207