MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4254357122 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14649048.v1

Accessibility at Airports: How Digital Media can put Toronto at the Forefront for Accessible Airport Travel

2021· preprint· en· W4254357122 on OpenAlexaffabout
Danielle Fraser

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWheelchairService (business)Process (computing)ConsignmentTransport engineeringBusinessFunction (biology)Computer scienceMarketingEngineeringWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This major research project explores the potential function of a mobile application to organize the consignment of wheelchairs at airports. Right now, many airports around the world are struggling to deal with the influx of wheelchair passengers. Many airports do not utilize any digital technology tools to assist them in the process of providing wheelchair service. Specifically, at Toronto Pearson International Airport (Pearson), wheelchair service is decentralized meaning that all airlines are responsible for organizing their own processes and service. This research uncovers some of the most commonly reported problems from both customers and employees regarding current wheelchair service at airports. This project finds that there is currently a fundamental communication gap between the employees and customers. Many passengers reported poor service due to not being about to navigate themselves through the process. Additionally, passengers report that the overall consignment of wheelchairs is often so poor that they are left waiting long periods of time for a chair and can sometimes be taken out of their chair before they are ready to walk. This project designed a mobile application interface that could provide both customers and employees with a way of communicating. This mobile application focuses on assisting employees with the organization of chairs and helps customers guide themselves through a more efficient process. This project applies itself to the model and processes that currently exist at Toronto International Pearson Airport.

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)0.004
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 score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0140.009
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.003

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUrban Transport and Accessibility→French-language works237,207→