MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407572216 · doi:10.1007/s11116-025-10590-0

Agent-based modelling of older adult needs for autonomous mobility-on-demand: a case study in Winnipeg, Canada

2025· article· en· W4407572216 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Manon Prédhumeau, Ed Manley

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilUniversity of Leeds
KeywordsTransport engineeringGeographyGerontologyEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As the populations continue to age across many nations, ensuring accessible and efficient transportation options for older adults has become an increasingly important concern. Autonomous Mobility-on-Demand (AMoD) systems have emerged as a potential solution to address the needs faced by older adults in their daily mobility. However, estimation of older adult mobility needs, and how they vary over space and time, is crucial for effective planning and implementation of such service, and conventional four-step approaches lack the granularity to fully account for these needs. To address this challenge, we propose an agent-based model of older adults mobility demand in Winnipeg, Canada. The model is built for 2022 using primarily open data, and is implemented in the Multi-Agent Transport Simulation toolkit. After calibration to accurately reproduce observed travel behaviours, a new AMoD service is tested in simulation and its potential adoption among Winnipeg older adults is explored. The model can help policy makers to estimate the needs of the elderly populations for door-to-door transportation and can guide the design of AMoD transport systems.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.650
Threshold uncertainty score0.896

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportationSame topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207