Context-Sensitive Urban Transportation Design in West Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The University of Pennsylvania is located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Activities within the campus are supported by a host of transportation modes: private automobile, commercial vehicles, public transportation (including bus, light rail, heavy rail, and commuter rail), bicycling, and walking. In an effort to enhance the overall functioning of the transportation system in the campus area, the university has partnered with the City of Philadelphia to improve the design and operation of facilities. This paper describes those efforts, emphasizing the jurisdictional and institutional challenges. The principal objectives of the campus redesign are to increase pedestrian and bicycle safety, to upgrade transit image and performance, to maintain or increase vehicular capacity, and to accommodate the reliable movement of goods. The achievement of these objectives is complicated by several issues. The campus is traversed by State Highway 3, portions of which were designed to standards that are inconsistent with the campus goals. Design and operational considerations are influenced by the access needs of the university hospitals. Institutionally, challenges arise from within the university community, particularly on questions of parking, and from within the public agencies, with regard to modern traffic engineering practices. Efforts to achieve the transportation goals can be considered a work in progress. Several positive design and operational upgrades have been successfully implemented; and these, in turn, have established new acceptable design criteria. Other design projects remain in the evaluation phase. Several policy actions or statements require attention. The lessons learned and technical standards developed are transferable to other older cities throughout North America.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".