MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388657913 · doi:10.1061/9780784485163.105

Creating Sustainable Urban Mass Transit Systems in Developing Economies

2023· article· en· W4388657913 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Diana M. Diaz, Xian Liu, Yun Bai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMegacityGreenhouse gasSustainabilityQuarter (Canadian coin)Developing countryTransit (satellite)Sustainable developmentGeographyTransit systemBusinessEnvironmental planningEconomyEconomic growthPublic transportPolitical scienceEngineeringTransport engineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urban mass rapid transit (MRT) systems are genuinely considered green infrastructure projects due to their inherited characteristics of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by decreasing car dependence. In 2021, developing economies were responsible for 82% of megacities worldwide, and a quarter of them still do not have an MRT system. This paper examines the economic, social, and environmental impacts of metros in seven megacities located in different sub-regions of four continents: South America, Asia, Africa, and Europe. Data from elevated, underground, and surface-level metro lines in Shanghai, Tehran, Istanbul, Sao Paulo, Bangkok, Mexico City, and Cairo was gathered through detailed and in-depth data collection involving reports, peer-reviewed papers, and official data over the projects’ lifetime, reveals the need of investing in sustainable MRT systems in developing countries, and provides a framework to reach sustainability and carbon reduction targets by 2050.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designNot applicable
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 topicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments→French-language works237,207→