MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394395127 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.11628603

Speed and road grade dynamics of urban trips on electric and conventional bicycles

2020· dataset· en· W4394395127 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amr Mohamed, Alexander Bigazzi

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2020
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTRIPS architectureTransport engineeringElectric carsDynamics (music)GeographyEngineeringPsychologyAutomotive engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electric-assist bicycles (e-bikes) allow cyclists to travel at higher speeds and climb hills with less effort. Beyond average speed differences, little is known about the unique travel dynamics of e-bikes. The objective of this study is to examine systematic differences in speed and road grade dynamics between electric and conventional bicycle trips. Data were collected for 1451 utilitarian bicycle trips in Vancouver, Canada (10% on e-bikes). A subset of conventional bicycle trips were matched to the age, gender, purpose, and terrain characteristics of the e-bike sample. Biking schedules were constructed to represent the archetypal speed and grade dynamics of each set of trips. Results show that in addition to higher speeds, e-bike trips have significantly greater speed dynamics, substantially increasing the motive power and energy required for e-bike travel. Speed and grade dynamics are important aspects of microscopic cycling behaviour, with applications including vehicle design, facility design, and health evaluation.

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)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.443
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.006

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207