Cycling and Weather: A Multi-city and Multi-facility Study in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the impact of weather across utilitarian bicycle facilities in different North American cities, as well as across different facility types (utilitarian, recreational, and mixed-use). For this purpose, automatic hourly bicycle count data is used from Montreal, Ottawa, Vancouver, Portland, and several towns and cities along the “Route Verte” in Quebec. Particular attention is given to the impact of weather on weekdays vs. the weekend, lagged effects of precipitation, and the effects of alternate weather measurements, like dew point temperature. Among the main findings, temperature and humidity were found to be positively and negatively correlated with cycling, respectively, and the effects of both were in some instances observed to be non-linear. Rain can have a strong negative impact on cycling that increases in magnitude with rain intensity. In addition, lagged effects of rain were confirmed, such as rain the previous three hours, rain in the morning only, and rain in the afternoon only. In general, utilitarian facilities behave uniformly across cities, though the sensitivity to weather conditions can vary greatly; Montreal and Portland appear to be least sensitive to weather, with Ottawa appearing most sensitive and Vancouver in the middle. Furthermore, the impact of weather is greater on weekends than or weekdays and on recreational facilities than utilitarian facilities, and mixed-use facilities can exhibit characteristics of both. Finally, dew point depression has a positive effect on cycling.
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 | 0.013 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".