Temporal and mode-based accessibility to urban tourism spots: A spatial travel time analysis—Budapest
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
Efficient access to tourist spots is necessary for enhancing the overall travel experience, especially in urban environments. This study investigates the accessibility of key tourist spots in Budapest through different transportation modes (e.g., walking, cycling, and public transport) across various time intervals. Using spatial-temporal travel time maps and detailed statistical analysis, the research highlighted significant differences in how these modes connect tourists to their attractions. Cycling stands out as the most efficient transportation option, providing rapid access to a wide range of tourist spots, while public transport ranks second. However, the study also reveals disparities in accessibility, with central areas being well-served, while outer ones, especially in the northwest, remain less accessible. These findings highlight the need for targeted transportation improvements to ensure that all areas of the city are equally reachable. The results offer valuable insights for urban planners and policymakers aiming to enhance tourism infrastructure and improve the visitor experience in Budapest.TRANSLATE with x EnglishArabicHebrewPolishBulgarianHindiPortugueseCatalanHmong DawRomanianChinese SimplifiedHungarianRussianChinese TraditionalIndonesianSlovakCzechItalianSlovenianDanishJapaneseSpanishDutchKlingonSwedishEnglishKoreanThaiEstonianLatvianTurkishFinnishLithuanianUkrainianFrenchMalayUrduGermanMalteseVietnameseGreekNorwegianWelshHaitian CreolePersian // TRANSLATE with COPY THE URL BELOW Back EMBED THE SNIPPET BELOW IN YOUR SITE Enable collaborative features and customize widget: Bing Webmaster PortalBack//
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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