MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416015119 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2025-0172

Integrated spatial economic and travel demand modeling framework for transportation infrastructure impact assessment

2025· article· en· W4416015119 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Amila Sandaradura, Ali Farhan, Matiur Rahman

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsGovernment of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic impact analysisProductivityInvestment (military)Land useSupply and demandTransportation infrastructureEconomic modelLand-use planningEconomic evaluation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents an integrated spatial economic and travel demand modeling framework for quantifying the monetary benefits of transportation infrastructure, an essential element of project impact assessment. Building on existing literature in spatial economic modeling (SEM), the study enhances current practices by integrating a SEM with a regional travel demand model to simulate the interactions among land use, accessibility, and economic activity. Rather than focusing solely on direct travel-related benefits, the framework captures broader and more nuanced economic effects, including productivity gains, land use shifts, and improved market access. The framework is applied to a representative infrastructure scenario in Alberta to illustrate its practical utility. The results demonstrate the value of combining spatial economic theory with empirical modeling to generate geographically detailed and policy-relevant economic impact estimates. This approach supports more comprehensive and data-informed investment evaluations aligned with regional planning and decision-making criteria.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering→Same topicUrban Transport and Accessibility→French-language works237,207→