MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W650771425 · doi:10.5038/2375-0901.3.3.1

Factor Analysis for the Study of Determinants of Public Transit Ridership

2001· article· en· W650771425 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Transportation · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLogistic regressionPublic transportUncorrelatedFactor (programming language)OddsTransit (satellite)Factor analysisEconometricsStatisticsTransport engineeringBusinessComputer scienceEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Behavioral studies based on attitude survey questionnaires with numerous variables may be tainted with repetitions and correlations. To overcome these deficiencies, a factor analysis approach is demonstrated that produces clusters of uncorrelated factors. From 47 observable variables contained in the Ottawa-Carleton Transportation Commission (OC Transpo) attitude survey, only 8 underlying/actors have emerged. Bus information service is the most important factor. In addition to factor analysis, this article reports on a logistic regression model, based on key factors, for estimating the odds of ridership.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.222 · 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