MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405694969 · doi:10.1155/atr/2344587

Key Characteristics of Multimodal Public Transport Across the Entire Commuting Process: Quantitative Evidence from Shanghai

2024· article· en· W4405694969 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Meiping Yun, Junjun Zhan, Cen Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPublic transportKey (lock)Process (computing)Transport engineeringComputer scienceRegional scienceProcess managementBusinessEngineeringGeographyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determining the critical factors influencing commuters’ choice of public transport is essential for increasing its commuting mode share. This study examines multimodal public transport (metro and bus) across the entire commuting process by utilizing survey data on commuting behavior and Internet‐extracted data. The concept of travel time ratio, defined as the ratio of public transport travel time to car travel time for the same origin–destination (OD), is introduced to perform a quantitative analysis. A classification and regression tree (CART) model is then applied to identify and rank the key characteristics affecting public transport selection for commuting, and a marginal utility analysis quantifies their impact on commuting behavior. The results show that the travel time ratio is the most critical variable influencing commuters’ choice of public transport. Under the same commuting task, the average travel time of public transport is 25% longer than that of cars. This figure can reach nearly 70% for buses and 10% for the metro, which is the main reason for the low efficiency of public transport. Service characteristics optimization has a more substantial impact on increasing the commuting mode share for metro services than for buses. For every 0.1 decrease in the travel time ratio, the average commuting mode share for the metro and buses increased by 3.7% and 2.4%, respectively. To attract more commuters to public transport, it is necessary to maintain the travel time ratio within the range of 1–1.5. For bus services, in addition to improving commuting efficiency, it is essential to optimize convenience characteristics, such as transfer times, walking distance, and service frequency. This includes ensuring no transfers and maintaining a walking distance of less than 880 m. If the walking distance exceeds this threshold, the travel time ratio should be reduced below 1.1. Commuters without a private car demonstrate a higher tolerance for bus services, with a travel time ratio threshold of 1.8, provided that the overall service frequency is within 7 min. When fully served by the metro, if its service distance is within 6 km, the travel time should be comparable to that of cars to remain competitive. This study provides a quantitative basis for increasing the commuting mode share of public transport and improving its service quality.

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)0.003
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 score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207