MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W59027735

Performance Evaluation of Signage System in Subway Stations

2011· dissertation· en· W59027735 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSafety Warnings and Signage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSignageLegibilityVisibilityStandardizationComputer scienceDigital signageTransport engineeringSet (abstract data type)SchematicService (business)TypefaceEngineeringMultimediaGeographyAdvertising
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An information integrated, recognition accessible and format standardized signage system is not only a basic feature of a subway station, but also a factor that contributes to the smooth and well-organized operation of the subway service. To figure out the deficiency and limitation of existing signs in one subway station, and to further recover and improve the signage function, a comprehensive performance assessment of the signage system is necessary and compulsory, if not periodically, as least when major system modifications/enhancements are executed. In this study, a methodology is proposed to evaluate the signage performance from three aspects: information integration, visibility optimization and legibility standardization.
\n
\n\tInformation integration requires a complete signage system in the station offering demanded and mandatory information to the public. It is examined via a comparison between the existing signs and a standardized signage system, which is defined in three stages: station element and passenger flow identification, signage definition and classification, and signage implementation. Visibility optimization means the signs should be set and installed in a proper way regarding to the color, panel size, lighting, orientation and height, to maximize their ability of drawing and facilitating passenger’s attention and recognition. The visibility of one sign is evaluated as one of the three levels: optimized visibility, limited visibility and impaired visibility. Legibility standardization introduces guidelines on format displaying of signs with respect to typeface, color application and information presentation, to achieve for passenger’s easy acceptance and understanding of signage information.
\n
\n\tBased on the methodology, an implementation flowchart is developed for generic signage evaluation in one subways station. A case study (Berri-UQAM Metro station) in Montreal city is tested as a step-by-step application of this methodology in a real-world system. The absent signs and signs that need improvement are identified in detail and the evaluation result is summarized, as basis for further ameliorative measures.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.268 · 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