What influences intention to use a first-mile/last-mile automated shuttle service in a suburban area? A case study in Toronto, Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We surveyed the public in 2021 about a temporary first-mile/last-mile (FMLM) automated shuttle trial (planned for operation on public roads) in Toronto, Canada, before its deployment for public use. Our objectives were to investigate predictors of intention-to-use in a mixed traffic context in Canada and whether factors affecting the likelihood of trying the shuttle differed from those affecting the intended frequency of use. Our results showed that higher perceived usefulness, positive attitude towards the service, and higher trust in the shuttle capabilities significantly predicted both measures, but age was a significant (negative) predictor only for the intended frequency of use. This difference in demographic effects for the two examined measures suggests that future research should assess intention-to-use in more detail. Our results can also inform strategies to promote future automated shuttle trials. For example, informational campaigns to promote trust in the shuttle’s capabilities and highlight the benefits of the service may improve intention-to-use.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it