MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Towards Smart Mobility: Journey Reconstruction for Frictionless Public Transit using GPS and GTFS Data

2023· article· en· W4385251733 on OpenAlexaffabout
Maryam Alizadeh, Hanna Haponenko, Nafise Ghorbankhani, Paniz Eilkhani, Mohamed Badr, Carlos Vidal, Ali Emadi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobal Positioning SystemTransit (satellite)Public transportComputer scienceTransport engineeringData collectionArchitectureAssisted GPSReal-time computingEngineeringTelecommunicationsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper delivers a state-of-the-art survey on frictionless travel for on-the-road public transportation using Global Position System (GPS) data. Different Automatic Fare Collection (AFC) approaches and the importance of journey reconstruction in public transit for accurate route and fare generation and, consequently, route and fare correction are explained. A journey reconstruction engine using the passenger's GPS and real-time General Transit Feed Specification (GTFS) data from the city public transit API is developed for the Check-In/Check-Out (CICO) ticketing approach. In addition, an intuitive GPS fetching time selection is explained to decrease battery drain while using the proposed architecture. Furthermore, different scenarios for collecting data in Hamilton, ON, Canada, are defined to study the effectiveness of the proposed system. To validate the model, data was collected using our developed transportation application, which enables travellers to check in and check out upon boarding and disembarking the bus. The routes were compared using real- time GTFS data to determine the passenger's transit services and accurately reconstruct their journeys. The performance of the journey reconstruction engine was assessed across multiple scenarios, with future directions for the research also explored.

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)0.003
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.238
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.149 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Mobility and Location-Based AnalysisFrench-language works237,207