BRT omnibus : how bus rapid transit enhances mobility
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) has emerged in the 21st century as a leading form of building rapid transit in urban environs due to their ability as a rapidly implementable, relatively low-cost, flexible, and high-quality transit mode. While the popularity of the BRT mode continues to grow worldwide, there remains a degree of uncertainty over what designing for success looks like for BRT systems. This paper sought to determine whether there was a "correct" design approach for BRT implementation through literature review and case study. The case study revealed that despite differences in design and implementation, the cases successfully attained their respective planning and performance objectives. The inherent flexibility of the BRT mode allowed for BRT systems to be scaled to a wide array of operating and ridership contexts, as well as allow for incremental enhancements to the system as the passenger demands, available financing, and political will for upgrades arise. </p>
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it