MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405099130 · doi:10.22215/etd/2024-16349

An Investigation into Mobility Tool Ownership and Mode Choice Behavior of High-Rise Condo Residents - a Case Study of the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area

2024· dissertation· en· W4405099130 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Reihaneh Azhdar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMode (computer interface)GeographyGerontologyEngineeringPsychologySociologyComputer scienceMedicineHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decreasing single occupancy vehicle (SOV) use not only reduces the economic burden of congestion but also reduces the need for parking, decreases development costs, and benefits the environment by reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.This thesis aims to reduce SOV trips among high-rise condominium residents in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area.A Stated Preference (SP) survey was conducted to examine mode choice and mobility tool ownership behaviors.Various multinomial and mixed logit models were estimated to identify the factors influencing mode choice and understand the effectiveness of condospecific transportation demand management (TDM) policies.Moreover, a trivariate ordered probit model was estimated to reveal factors affecting mobility tool ownership.The results show that the building's geographical location, tenure status, and parking availability significantly affect car ownership.Additionally, TDM policies, including an innovative parking policy, transit fare incentives, the provision of an e-bike share station, and membership discounts, are effective in encouraging residents to shift toward active modes and public transportation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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