Organización y distribución de los flujos de tráfico en Logroño
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El objetivo principal de este trabajo es analizar el reparto del trcífr`co en el interior de la ciudad (le Logroño, haciendo hincapié en las diférencias entre lasf ranjas horarias (hora punta v hora llana) y los días laborables v festivos. La expansión.física (le /ti ciu- dad a partir de los años setenta del .siglo precedente, la concentración de nrcfs (le la -itad de la población ele la comrmidad N, su condición ele capital son, entre otros,facto- re s, los responsables de las trarrsfórrnaciones que la ciudad ha eipe rintentado. La movi- lidad Iza crecido al ritmo de los cambios sociales i, el reparto de las actividades económicas dentro del casco urbano condiciona losf lujos (le vehículos (le manera clara, tanto a nivel espacial como temporal. = The aim of this paper is to analvse traffic distribution in inner Logroño, focttsing on the différences between rush-hour and off peak hour and weekdavs and holidavs. The phisical expansion of tlre town from de 1970s in the XX` century, the concen-tration of half the region population and the.fact of being the capital cite are, among other ftctors, responsible for the changes that the town has gone through. Mobilitv has visen with the rhythrn of social changes and the distribution qf econo-mic .sectors in the inner part, determine traffic flows in a big way regarding, both, spa-tial and temporal aspects.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".