Investigating the Spatiotemporal Imbalance of Accessibility to Demand Responsive Transit (DRT) Service for People with Disabilities: Explanatory Case Study in South Korea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study analyzed the operation-related historical data of the call taxi service for disabled people in Seoul, South Korea. The study investigated how unevenly distributed the accessibility of disabled people to transportation is in terms of time and space. In addition, the reasons that cause imbalanced accessibility were investigated in areas with good and poor accessibility. Accessibility was defined as how quickly call taxi services for the disabled are available at specific times and locations. For the analysis, the log data for tracking the status of taxis in time and space were processed to calculate their availability, an index that reflects the dwelling time and the number of taxis available at a specific time and in a specific area. This index was divided into time and space and used as a surrogate measure to assess accessibility. The results showed that there were spatial and temporal accessibility imbalances in demand responsive transit (DRT) service. The insufficient supply during the night resulting from the current DRT operating schedule has reduced the accessibility of call taxis for the disabled, and the concentration of drivers’ breaks also affected the accessibility of service during the daytime. This suggests the need for (1) an increase in supply and (2) evenly distributed breaks for the drivers. In terms of space, the outer areas of Seoul generally were found to be more accessible than the central areas. In addition, areas near depots that serve as hubs and resting places for taxi drivers, areas with excellent medical infrastructures for people with disabilities, and areas with good traffic environments tended to have good accessibility; this suggests the need to reallocate garages and improve the traffic environments to improve accessibility.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".