MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288781691 · doi:10.54941/ahfe1002729

Sustainable Transport Development Strategy in Developed and Developing Countries

2022· article· en· W4288781691 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAHFE international · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUrban Transport Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainable developmentSustainable transportChinaInvestment (military)Transportation planningBusinessScopusEnvironmental economicsTransport engineeringSustainabilityEngineeringEconomicsGeographyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to explore the idea of sustainable transportation in the United States, China, Canada, and South Korea. Sustainable transportation has an essential role in developing a sustainable city that pays attention to an effectiveness-oriented transportation system that impacts the economy, the environment, and the quality of social life. The selection of case studies in four countries motivated the top four countries from the keywords sustainable transportation. This study uses a bibliometric analysis method using data sources from 306 articles (Scopus). The data search was carried out using the keyword "sustainable transportation" from 2012-to 2022. The highest number of research trends in the United States is 166 articles; China has 102 pieces, Canada has 46 papers, and South Korea has 26 articles. The data analysis stage was carried out using the Vos Viewer and Nvivo 12 Plus software. The results show that each country has a different focus measured from three aspects: planning, information, and investment. Planning factors include types of transportation, routes, costs, carbon emissions, and applications. The information aspect consists of estimation, trip, and performance. The investment aspect includes current demands and issues to shape future policies. Development strategy Sustainable Transportation in the planning stage only focuses on the use of vehicle emissions. In contrast, in the information aspect, it focuses on travel modes, then in the investment aspect, there is no attention to future policies related to issues that occur today. In the planning part of Sustainable Transportation, China has a varied focus, such as the type of transportation used, emissions, and the route used for transportation. In contrast, the Chinese state has not paid attention to this focus on the information and investment aspects. Meanwhile, Canada and South Korea have not focused on planning, information, and investment aspects. From these findings, it is hoped that it can provide input for various countries to pay more attention to these aspects to achieve sustainable transportation in smart cities. The concept of sustainable transportation is also helpful for achieving SDG's 11th goal.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.200 · 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