MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analyzing Public Transit Schedule Deviations: A Case Study on Montreal Using Real-Time Data

2024· article· en· W4399564080 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emna Boudabous, Mohamed Karaa, Lokman Sboui, Julio Montecinos, Omar Alam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic transportComputer scienceScheduleTransit (satellite)Real-time computingTransport engineeringOperations researchEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metropolitan cities heavily rely on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) to enhance the overall well-being of their citizens. Despite the implementation of various policies and strategies aimed at improving the reliability and quality of public transportation services, transit authorities consistently face criticism from commuters. The main cause of dissatisfaction arises from deviations in scheduled bus arrival times, leading to either early or late arrivals that disrupt the schedules of commuters. These deviations can result in missed appointments, prolonged wait times at bus stops, and instances of being late for work. This paper provides a preliminary analysis of the public transit system in Montreal City, focusing on delays and deviations. It utilizes planned and real-time transit data to quantify, locate, and classify deviations as systematic (i.e., deviations that are accommodated in the schedules by the transit authority) or stochastic (unforeseen deviations, e.g., due to sudden road accidents). The paper also explores using machine learning models to predict stochastic delays.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designObservational
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 topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207