Youth and Public Transit: A Knowledge Synthesis of Recent Publications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Historically, youth (13-25) have been one of the most active user groups of public transit in Canada, accounting for one-third of ridership nation-wide, and up to two-thirds in cities such as Moose Jaw, SK and Red Deer, AB (Canadian Urban Transit Association, 2004). Despite their high usage of public transportation, youth as a specific category of riders have received an underwhelming amount of focus by academics and transit authorities. This report synthesizes the last ten years of evidence, policy, and pilot projects related to youth as a public transportation user group in order to provide an up-to-date summary of the state of knowledge in this area. Youth and public transportation research is identified and evaluated, including data sources and gaps. Media coverage of the issue is also considered, as many of the concerns of youth, public debates, and pilot programs related to youth and public transit are only referenced in this format. The final section of this work consists of an evidence-based agenda for future research and policy, with an eye toward enhancing the equity of access to transit systems for youth riders.
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 | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.027 | 0.041 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".