L’accès au transport collectif pour les piétons vulnérables : Étude de cas de la région métropolitaine de Montréal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’utilisation du transport collectif comporte une expérience hors du réseau. Cette partie du trajet, soit le premier et le dernier kilomètres, comprend les déplacements pour accéder au réseau à partir du lieu d’origine ainsi que pour se rendre à la destination à partir du réseau. De nombreuses études ont documenté des facteurs de l’environnement bâti qui influencent le choix de la marche pour parcourir ces distances. Ces facteurs sont perçus différemment par certains groupes de piétons plus vulnérables, tels que les personnes aînées, les personnes avec des limitations fonctionnelles ainsi que les parents de jeunes enfants. Ce mémoire vise à répondre à la question suivante : est-ce que les besoins en termes de marchabilité objective et les attitudes des piétons vulnérables envers la marche vers le transport collectif influencent leur expérience dans le premier et dernier kilomètres? En mobilisant un cadre conceptuel basé sur une approche socioécologique de la marche et des attitudes, ce mémoire met en évidence les différentes limites vécues par les piétons vulnérables dus à l'interaction entre l’environnement bâti, les saisons ainsi que les caractéristiques individuelles des participants. La perception de l’aménagement aux abords des arrêts a bel et bien un impact sur l'attitude envers le transport collectif, ce qui peut avoir des répercussions sur les comportements de mobilité des piétons vulnérables. The use of public transit includes an out of vehicle experience. This part of the trip, known as the first-mile/last-mile, includes trips to access the network from the origin and to reach the destination from the network. Numerous studies have documented factors in the built environment that influence the choice of walking these distances. These factors are perceived differently by certain more vulnerable groups of pedestrians, such as the elderly, people with disabilities and parents of young children. This thesis aims to answer the following question: do the needs and attitudes of vulnerable pedestrians towards walking to access public transit influence their experience in the first and last kilometers? By mobilizing a conceptual framework based on a socio-ecological approach to walking and attitudinal factors, this dissertation highlights the different limitations experienced by vulnerable pedestrians due to the interaction between the built environment, the seasons and individual characteristics of the participants. The perception of the built environment around transit stops does have an impact on attitudes towards public transport, which in turn can have repercussions on the mobility behaviors of vulnerable pedestrians.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".