MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4360933718

NREL On-Demand Transit Research and Fort Erie Case Study

2023· paratext· en· W4360933718 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bonnie Powell

Bibliographic record

VenueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · 2023
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of Energy EfficiencyOffice of Energy Efficiency and Renewable EnergyU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsTransit (satellite)Transport engineeringComputer scienceAeronauticsEngineeringPublic transport
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On-demand systems have increased in popularity in recent years, especially in rural and smaller-sized communities. This presentation provides a brief introduction to NREL's on-demand mobility research and an in-depth case study of the town of Fort Erie, Ontario. Fort Erie is a relatively sparsely populated region of 32,901 residents, spread across a land area of 166 square kilometers (64 square miles), for an average population density of 193 residents per square kilometer (500 per square mile). In October 2021, the town implemented a mobility-on-demand system integrated with smartphone software to replace its fixed-route community bus system, which consisted of four buses with three routes, each with a roughly 1-hour, one-way loop. The new service utilizes a fleet of six minivans, two of which are retrofitted with wheelchair-accessible ramps. The system may require that a passenger requesting a standard van walk up to 400 meters (a quarter mile) to their pickup location to optimize vehicle routing while providing origin-to-destination service. The on-demand system proved effective in providing service, eclipsing pre-pandemic ridership by 40%, decreasing greenhouse gas emissions per ride by 63%, and decreasing the cost to the town per ride by 29%. This presentation documents both the previous system and the new system in terms of routes, ridership, costs, fuel, and other notable system parameters. This work is part of an ongoing series of case studies on providing small communities with on-demand, right-sized vehicle service coupled with a smartphone application.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designCase report
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)→Same topicTransportation Planning and Optimization→French-language works237,207→