MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413293266 · doi:10.1016/j.jpubtr.2025.100135

Bit by bit: A method for using bus data to develop plan bus priority interventions in Portland, Oregon, USA

2025· article· en· W4413293266 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

VenueJournal of Public Transportation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBit (key)Plan (archaeology)Computer sciencePsychological interventionTelecommunicationsComputer securityPsychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bus Priority Interventions are small-scale changes that improve bus speed and reliability. These include changes to street geometry, bus stops, and traffic signals. Automated Vehicle Location-Automated Passenger Counting (AVL-APC) data can help transit agencies by providing insight into bus location, speed, and passenger volumes. This work proposes an end-to-end methodology for using AVL-APC data to create a concept design for bus priority interventions on a bus corridor. The proposed method is illustrated by analyzing a bus route in Portland, Oregon. This mixed-methods approach paired quantitative data analysis with site visits to identify what was causing delay on the route and suggest targeted interventions. Scenario analysis of historical trip data was employed to predict the impact of different interventions. Historical trips that fell into two different scenarios were compared: a delay scenario (where a specific delay-inducing event occurred, like a red light) and a non-delay scenario (where that event did not occur). This end-to-end methodology could be used by transit agencies and transportation planners to quickly assess different corridors and interventions, diagnose problems, and determine which projects would create the greatest customer and financial benefits. Employing this approach could help planners prioritize time and resources to ensure that the highest impact projects are pursued.

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)0.001
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 score0.578
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.266 · 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