MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245689577 · doi:10.15760/etd.5662

Issues in Urban Trip Generation

2000· report· en· W4245689577 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kristina Currans

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransport engineeringTrip generationEngineeringOperations research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the 1976, the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) compiled their first Handbook of guidelines and methods for evaluating development-level transportation impacts, specifically vehicular impacts (Institute of Transportation Engineers 1976). Decades later, these methods--essentially the same as when they were originally conceived--are used ubiquitously across the US and Canada. Only recently, with the guidelines in its third edition of the ITE's Trip Generation Handbook (Institute of Transportation Engineers 2014) new data and approaches have been adopted--despite substantial evidence that questions the accuracy of older data, automobile bias, and lack of sensitivity to urban contexts. This dissertation contributes to this literature by focusing on the data, methods, and assumptions so commonly included in development- or site-level evaluation of transportation impacts. These methods are omnipresent in development-level review--used in transportation impact analyses or studies (TIAs/TISs) of vehicular or mode-based impacts, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and estimates of emissions, scaling or scoping development size, and evaluating transportation system development, impact or utility fees or charges. However, few have evaluated the underlying characteristics of these foundational data--with few exceptions--this manuscript takes aim at understanding inherent issues in the collection and application of ITE's data and methods in various urban contexts. This manuscript includes a compiled dissertation, four papers written consecutively. The first, evaluates state-of-the-art methods in Chapter 2--identifying gaps in the literature. Two such gaps are explored in Chapter 3 and Chapter 4. In Chapter 3, a larger implicit assumption present in ITE's methods--that the existing land-use taxonomy is an optimal and accurate way to describe land use and segment data. Results indicate a simplified taxonomy would provide substantial reductions in cost corresponding with a minor loss in the model's explanation of variance. Following, Chapter 4 explores a common assumption that requires ITE's vehicle trips be converted into person trips and applied across contexts. The results point to the need to consider demographics in site-level transportation impact analysis, particularly to estimate overall demand (person trips, transaction activity) at retail and service development. In Chapter 5, the findings from this research and previous studies are extrapolated to evaluate and quantify the potential bias when temporal, special, and social contexts are ignored. The results indicate the compounding overestimation of automobile demand may inflate estimation by more than 100% in contexts where ITE should be applicable (suburban areas with moderate incomes). In the conclusions (Chapter 6), the implications of this work are explored, followed by recommendations for

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)0.050
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.158
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0500.158
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.016
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.010
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207