Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rapid population growth, increasing congestion, and years of under investment in transit in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) led the Government of Ontario to create a regional transportation agency, Metrolinx, in 2006.Metrolinx developed the region's first ever Regional Transportation Plan, The Big Move. The Growth Plan aims to curb sprawl and protect green space, revitalize downtowns, create complete communities, provide for a range of housing options, reduce traffic congestion by offering a range of transportation choices, and integrate infrastructure investments with land use planning. Fifty-one mobility hubs are identified at major transit stations that are to be places that provide travellers with seamless access to the regional transit system, support higher density, mixed-use development, and demonstrate excellence in customer service. In 2011, Metrolinx created Mobility Hub Guidelines. The Guidelines communicate the mobility hub concept; provide guidance for mobility hub and station planning and development across the GTHA; and guide Metrolinx in planning efforts, infrastructure design and facilities in mobility hubs and stations. They describe nine key mobility hub objectives, which are organized into three categories: Seamless Mobility, Placemaking, and Successful Implementation. Under each objective are more detailed guidelines, and under each guideline are more detailed approaches. Symbols identify where the approaches would apply to specific mobility hub typologies and cross references to other guidelines. Each Guideline also includes sidebars on the benefits and applicability of the guideline; tools and resources; relevant Big Move policy; case studies or best practices; and illustrative diagrams and precedent photos. This project was nominated for the TAC 2011 Sustainable Urban Transportation Award. For the covering abstract of this conference see ITRD record number 201211RT334E.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.298 | 0.153 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".