Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This chapter provides a broad overview of the governance of public transit systems in Canada. Transit plays a relatively minor role in the overall Canadian transportation system, due to a combination of geographical and policy factors. Nonetheless, public transit is an important mode of transport in large Canadian cities. In legal terms, public transit is a responsibility of Canada’s provinces, but all provinces except for one in turn delegate this responsibility to municipal governments. This jurisdictional decentralization, together with the lack of general-purpose transit legislation in most provinces, means that the structure and governance of transit systems varies widely across cities. Transit operations depend heavily on fare box revenues, and the steep decline in ridership during the Covid-19 pandemic has produced a lingering operating revenue crisis. The capital funding situation is more positive, since all three levels of government have recently invested significant funds in expanding urban transit infrastructure. However, the vertical and horizontal fragmentation of transit governance in some city-regions has politicized, complicated and delayed the construction of new high-capacity transit lines. The chapter examines these issues and challenges with a specific focus on the three largest city-regions in Canada: Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".