MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7024572656

Squaring the circle: The BHLS concept

2010· article· en· W7024572656 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUPM Digital Archive (Technical University of Madrid) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)Public transportQuality (philosophy)Service (business)Point (geometry)Service qualityBus rapid transitPerspective (graphical)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transport systems known as Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) was launched in Curitiba, Brazil, in 1974 as a means of offering efficient and effective bus travel within the fast expanding city. This experience, together with other big examples like in Ottawa (since 1983) or in Quito (since 1994), have proven to be an efficient and effective solution to mass transport.
\nThroughout Europe similar experiences have started to be developed, but responding to a different concept of quality of service.
\nBus systems such as the “trunk network”, in Sweden, the Metrobus, in Germany, or the BHNS (Bus à Haut Niveau de Service), broach the quality of service from a wider perspective than the BRT, as it considers aspects such as image, confort...,apart from speed, frequency or reliability. 
\nThese new systems - BHLS (Buses with a High Quality of Service) - allow to combine quality of service of tramways with the lower costs and higher flexibility of bus systems, and offers very interesting solutions in terms of accessibility, a wide range of service levels, that allows the system to be adapted to the different urban contexts (size, population, density…)
\nIn the economic situation we are now living, the lack of funds provides BHLS an important role in public transport. Less costs with the same quality of service seems to be a very attractive option.
\nThe aim of this article is to compare the different European experiences of tramways and BHLS, specially from the economic point of view, considering the costs, benefits and advantages of each of them.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueUPM Digital Archive (Technical University of Madrid)Same topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207