Bibliographic record
Abstract
Travel itineraries that persons who are blind can read, boarding announcements that people who are deaf can access and transportation information that cognitively disabled persons can use are some of the communications needs being addressed by a Code of Practice being implemented by the Canadian Transportation Agency (the Agency). Independent access to travel-related information is intended to reduce the vulnerability of persons with disabilities when traveling long distances. Having the right information available when it is needed will increase safety and security by enhancing self-reliance and independence within a helping transportation environment. This presentation will outline the evolution of the communication policy from research to action. It will consist of a results focused discussion of these communications standards. Hands-on solutions to long standing transportation barriers will be showcased. Participants will be exposed to low cost, no cost solutions that can be applied to most transportation environments. The purpose of the Communication Code of Practice is to improve the flow of information to persons with disabilities as they interface with the federal transportation system. The Code addresses: provision of travel-related information in alternative formats (Braille, audio cassette, captioning, etc.), availability of TTY phones, public announcements in terminals, on-board announcements, information monitors, signage in terminals, ground transportation service information, transportation operational features, tactile seat markers, reserved seating at boarding gates, provision of security information and the adoption of new technology. The goal of the Code is to make life easier for all travelers by ensuring that transportation products and environments are safer, more comfortable, more affordable, accessible, adaptable and easier to use, regardless of diverse communications abilities and needs. An important characteristic of the Code is that communication solutions do not segregate users and information systems do not become less usable by persons who are not disabled. How to expand the concept of access for all is the central theme of this paper. Removing communication barriers today provides a unique opportunity to prepare for the transportation service challenges of tomorrow’s aging market. Seniors with declining vision, reduced hearing, limited mobility, and an increased need for explicit service information will be the major consumers of multiple format transportation information in the future. Knowing what services are available and how to access them will be essential to keeping seniors and people with disabilities on the move in the hub and spokes of international travel. Customer service strategies to meet this communications challenge will be the legacy of this presentation for participants.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.905 | 0.802 |
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".