MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285784781 · doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2024.12.233

Inclusion persons with disabilities to a public transport system: An integrative decision-aiding approach

2025· article· en· W4285784781 on OpenAlexaff
Danijela Đorić, Yan Cimon, Igor Crévits, Saïd Hanafi, Raca Todosijević

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation research procedia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersUniversité Polytechnique Hauts-de-France
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)Public transportPsychologyDecision systemApplied psychologyGerontologyMedicineTransport engineeringEngineeringOperations researchSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The topic of integrating persons with disabilities in society is widely studied, especially nowadays, as it is estimated that one billion people are living with disabilities. The research focus of this paper is on the inclusion of disabled persons in the public transport system with an emphasis on their full autonomy. Several models in operational research treat this problem, such as transport on-demand with its varieties, the shortest path problem, even though they are often understood to focus on public transport rather than accessibility to the public network itself. Providing a full service to persons with disabilities in a public transport system is a very long process, which involves many participants. The diversity of the needs of disabled persons and the various interactions between these needs raises the level of complexity behind this process. To explore this problem, we used a decision-aiding approach, which allows to better guide the adaptations required from a transportation system while respecting both the issues at stake for stakeholders in the transportation value chain and the needs of people with disabilities. The goal is to put together all existing transportation models for PWD and offer different decision choices depending on the PWD needs and network characteristics. The main goal is to provide complete service to PWD without interruption with the different governing level decisions. The contributions of this article are multifold. First, we use a multidisciplinary approach to develop a matrix of the different fields of decision. Second, the decision-aiding process proposes a comprehensive analysis, which gives the ability to choose at any time the suitable model for the inclusion of disabled persons. Third, we put forth a scheme of the relationship among existing optimization models, depending on the public network information, more precisely on the concrete accessibility on the public network. Finally, yet importantly, the crucial contribution in this paper is the practical implementation of the decision-aiding process.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation research procediaSame topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207