MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396515458 · doi:10.22215/etd/2024-15862

What Will It Take to Make Non-Work Trips Sustainable? A Feminist Analysis of Transitions in Transportation Policies and Practice

2024· dissertation· en· W4396515458 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cassandra Lee Smith

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatus quoTransformative learningTRIPS architectureWork (physics)SustainabilityGovernment (linguistics)MobilitiesPublic policyInequalityPolitical scienceClimate changeSustainable transportEconomic growthPublic relationsBusinessSociologyTransport engineeringEconomicsEngineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many cities appear to be on the precipice of extraordinary change to meet the growing and interconnected challenges of climate change, housing need, inadequate transportation networks and social inequality.In this case study of Ottawa, Canada, the policies of the municipal government and responses from residents are examined to understand how they support or restrict transformative change to mobility, particularly with regard to non-work travel.The analysis, applying theories of sustainability transitions, finds limited signs of innovation and exnovation while overall lacking recognition of the necessity and urgency of changing the transportation status quo.This timid approach is reflected in interviews with residents and their responses to policy implementation.The findings of this research suggest that to shift mobility practices, there is a need to create momentum towards sustainable mobility and away from automobility.iii

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)0.003
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.021
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUrban Transport and Accessibility→French-language works237,207→