MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W602441854

ASSESSMENT OF MULTI-MODAL IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT IN A HIGH DENSITY URBAN AREA

2002· article· en· W602441854 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jim Gough

Bibliographic record

VenueITE 2002 Annual Meeting and ExhibitInstitute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedevelopmentPlan (archaeology)PedestrianTransport engineeringResidential areaEnvironmental planningMaster planUrban planningGeographyCivil engineeringEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A transportation study, conducted in a mixed-use area with high density commercial/residential development surrounding a major midtown subway station in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, is reviewed. The impetus for the study was a proposal for development far exceeding the approved density under the City's Official Plan. The potential precedent which could be set by this development indicated the need for an analysis of the implications for similar levels of redevelopment across a broader area within 4 to 5 blocks of the subway. There was a high level of concern in the adjacent stable residential communities, relating to traffic impacts, impacts on the subway system, and pedestrian impacts, both at-grade and in subway accesses. To address the concerns, an enhanced multi-modal assessment method was applied. The paper focuses on the acceptance of the analysis by the community and the City of Toronto. Questions addressed relate to the limits of growth in a typical urban area of mixed commercial/residential uses, with a strong existing orientation to alternate modes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueITE 2002 Annual Meeting and ExhibitInstitute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)Same topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207