MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W562736115

Entry Controls in Taxi Regulation: Lessons from North American Experience

2007· article· en· W562736115 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bruce Schaller

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 86th Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTRIPS architectureControl (management)Barriers to entryBusinessQuality (philosophy)Service (business)Industrial organizationEconomicsMarketingTransport engineeringEngineeringMarket structure
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper assesses the effects of entry regulation on cab availability and service quality in 43 cities and counties in the United States and Canada. Particular attention is given to the interaction between entry controls, entry qualifications and customer markets in shaping the effects of entry policy. The analysis shows that the effects of entry controls are quite different in cities and counties in which the preponderance of trips are initiated through telephone orders (dispatch) than in localities with significant cab stand and street hail markets. Entry restrictions are most applicable in walk-up cab stand and street hail markets while more flexible forms of entry control are most applicable in dispatch markets. A major challenge for officials charged with regulating taxi entry is to address the disparate needs of dispatch and walk-up markets in cities with substantial trip volumes in both markets. Approaches to this challenge and implications for regulation are discussed.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.361
Threshold uncertainty score0.726

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Board 86th Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardSame topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207