MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408789181 · doi:10.1016/j.commtr.2025.100172

Modular AI agents for transportation surveys and interviews: Advancing engagement, transparency, and cost efficiency

2025· article· en· W4408789181 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications in Transportation Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaMcGill UniversityUniversity of SydneyConcordia UniversityNational Research Foundation SingaporeSingapore-MIT Alliance for Research and Technology CentreMassachusetts Institute of Technology
KeywordsTransparency (behavior)Modular designBusinessComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surveys and interviews—structured, semi-structured, or unstructured—are widely used for collecting insights on emerging or hypothetical scenarios. Traditional human-led methods often face challenges related to cost, scalability, and consistency. For example, distributed questionnaires lack the ability to provide real-time guidance and request immediate clarifications. Recently, various domains have begun to explore the use of conversational agents (chatbots) powered by generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. However, considering decisions in transportation investments and policies often carry significant socioeconomic and environmental consequences, surveys and interviews face unique challenges in integrating AI agents. This issue underscors the need for a rigorous, explainable, and resource-efficient approach that enhances participant engagement and ensures privacy. This paper bridges this gap by introducing a modular approach accompanied by a parameterized process for designing and deploying AI agents for surveys and interviews, thereby supporting decision-makings in high-stakes contexts. We detail the system architecture, integrating engineered prompts, specialized knowledge bases, and customizable, goal-oriented conversational logic. We demonstrate the adaptability, generalizability, and efficacy of our modular approach through three empirical studies: (1) travel preference surveys, highlighting conditional logic and multimodal (voice, text, and image generation) capabilities; (2) public opinion elicitation on a newly constructed, novel infrastructure project, showcasing question customization and multilingual (English and French) capabilities; and (3) expert consultations about the impact of technologies on future transportation systems, highlighting real-time, clarification request capabilities for open-ended questions, resilience in handling erratic inputs, and efficient transcript postprocessing. The results suggest that the AI agent increases completion rates and response quality. Furthermore, the modular approach demonstrates controllability, flexibility, and robustness while addressing key ethical, privacy, security, and token consumption concerns. We believe this work lays the foundation for next-generation surveys and interviews in transportation research.

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 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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score0.821

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.295 · 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