MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W651240926

Edmonton’s LRT Setting the Stage for Heading Further South

2010· article· en· W651240926 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Art Washuta, Carole Cej

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaTRIPS architecturePublic transportGeographyPopulationCapital cityPopulation growthTransport engineeringBusinessEconomic growthEngineeringDemographyEconomicsArchaeologyEconomic geographySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The City of Edmonton is one of Canada's fastest growing cities. The capital of Alberta, Edmonton currently houses over 750,000 people and has a metropolitan population of over 1.1 million people. By 2040, Edmonton is expected to grow by 400,000 people – an increase of over 50%. To accommodate the ever-growing population, Edmonton not only has to develop new infrastructure, but also a transportation network capable of supporting the growth. Within the city, Edmonton has one of the highest car dependency rates in Canada. A 2005 Household Travel survey indicated that public transportation accounts for only 9% of the 2.5 million trips made each day, while vehicular travel accounts for approximately 77%. Further, between 1994 and 2005, the total amount of kilometers traveled by automobile in the city increased by 32%, despite a population growth of only 13% over the same period. The development and expansion of the existing public transportation system is thus fundamental to the City’s Transportation Master Plan.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.215
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0890.011

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.287 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207