Survey of Cross-Regional Intermodal Passenger Travel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an investigation of the mode choice behavior of cross-regional commuters in the greater Toronto and Hamilton area of Ontario, Canada. A survey of cross-regional intermodal passenger travel (called SCRIPT) was developed and conducted during the spring and the fall of 2014. SCRIPT collects data on respondents' revealed preference in daily commuting trips to pivot each respondent's mode choice stated preference experiment separately. An innovative multimodal trip planner tool was developed to generate feasible travel options for each stated preference experiment with information on household auto ownership level, proximity to transit, work start time, and total travel time from home to work, as well as predeveloped discrete choice models to identify access station locations of intermodal travel modes. The stated preference experiments were based on the D-efficient design technique. The survey used 1,203 randomly selected cross-regional commuters. The paper reports on a mode choice model estimated by the revealed preference data portion of the survey to verify the validity of the survey design, sampling procedure, and data quality. An empirical model provides insight into cross-regional commuters' mode choice behavior.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".