Impact of Areal Factors on Students’ Travel Mode Choices: A Bayesian Spatial Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A preliminary analysis of the 2018/2019 Austin Travel Survey indicated that most off-campus students in Travis County, TX, tend to use cars rather than more sustainable transportation modes, significantly contributing to traffic congestion and environmental impact. This study aims to analyze the impacts of areal factors, including environmental and transportation factors, on students’ choices of travel mode in order to promote more sustainable transport behaviors. Additionally, we investigate the presence of spatial correlation and unobserved heterogeneity in travel data and their effects on students’ travel mode choices. We have proposed two Bayesian models—a basic model and a spatial model—with structured and unstructured random-effect terms to perform the analysis. The results indicate that the inclusion of spatial random effects considerably improves model performance, suggesting that students’ choices of mode are likely influenced by areal factors often ‘unobserved’ in many individual travel mode choice surveys. Furthermore, we found that the average slope, sidewalk density, and bus-stop density significantly affect students’ travel mode choices. These findings provide insights into promoting sustainable transport systems by addressing environmental and infrastructural factors in an effort to reduce car dependency among students, thereby supporting sustainable urban development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".