MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416015115 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2025-0174

Machine learning-based analysis of factors influencing bus station traffic management in India

2025· article· en· W4416015115 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUpgradeTraffic congestionData collectionGovernment (linguistics)UrbanizationKey (lock)Public transportStatistical analysisMode (computer interface)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapid urbanization and increased private vehicle ownership have significantly intensified traffic congestion in Indian cities. In response, the Indian government has implemented various initiatives to strengthen public transportation, with buses constituting the predominant mode of urban transit. Consequently, the need to upgrade bus terminal infrastructure has become critical to support growing passenger volume and operational complexity. This study aims to prioritize the key factors influencing the functional performance of bus stations. A preliminary site investigation was conducted to assess existing infrastructural conditions, followed by comprehensive data collection through traffic surveys and structured questionnaires. Statistical analyses including Chi-squared test, validated the survey data. Integrated principal component and multi criteria decision analysis was employed to rank influential factors. Item rate analysis determined cost-sensitive components. Cluster analysis was used to assess interrelationships among variables. The results offer a robust, data-driven framework for optimizing future bus terminal planning and design with the proposed layout.

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 score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.169 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207