Home Location and Commuting Trade-offs of Two-Commuter Households: Case of National Capital Region of Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the relationship between commuting mode choice and home location attributes by using a joint econometric modelling framework. Home location attributes are characterized by the total commuting distances of two commuters and the angle between two workplaces at the home location. 2011 household travel survey data for the National Capital Region (NCR) is used for empirical investigation. It is found that auto driving is the most dominant mode for commuting for two-commuter households. Contrary to usual speculation, shared modes (e.g. auto passenger and transit kiss & ride modes) do not have a high modal share in two-commuter households. Empirical investigation reveals that two-worker households in the NCR are not able to optimize their home location (with reduced total commuting distance and a wider angle between two workplaces at the home location). While higher modal accessibility increases the angle and reduces the total commuting distance, various socio-economic and land use factors reduce the correlation between total commuting distances and the angle. So, this gives a cautionary tale to urban transportation and land use planners for taking these findings into considerations as the two-commuter households are increasing in proportion in many urban areas.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".