MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7112559148

Projet pilote sur les vélorues : étude de la compréhension, des comportements et de la sécurité des usagers vulnérables

2025· other· fr· W7112559148 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal) · 2025
Typeother
Languagefr
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Public accountingCivil servantsLimiting
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RÉSUMÉ: «Les vélorues, conçues comme des aménagements cyclables privilégiant la circulation des cyclistes tout en limitant le débit automobile, constituent une innovation relativement récente dans le paysage des infrastructures cyclables. Au Québec, elles ont été officiellement intégrées au Code de la sécurité routière en 2018, où elles sont définies comme « tout ou partie d’un chemin public sur lequel la circulation des cyclistes est favorisée ». Malgré leur potentiel, ces aménagements, encore peu répandus, demeurent mal compris tant par les cyclistes que par les automobilistes. Pour remédier à cette situation, la Ville de Montréal a bonifié deux vélorues existantes afin d’améliorer leur visibilité et leur fonctionnalité. Cette étude examine l’impact de ces modifications sur la compréhension et les comportements des usagers en adoptant une approche mixte, combinant enquête par sondage et analyse vidéo. Le sondage, administré avant et après les bonifications des aménagements, a révélé des améliorations au niveau de la compréhension et la perception des vélorues par les usagers. La proportion de répondants se disant familiers avec le concept est passée de 48,1 % à 51,7 %. Les perceptions liées à la priorité accordée aux cyclistes et à leur sécurité se sont également sensiblement améliorées, notamment parmi les répondants plus jeunes et les hommes. Par exemple, la part des participants évaluant leur sécurité et leur confort comme élevés ou très élevés a augmenté de 29,0 % à 42,7 %. Par ailleurs, la proportion de répondants affirmant qu’ils n’utiliseraient pas une vélorue accompagnés d’un enfant a diminué, passant de 53,4 % à 41,3 %, reflétant une amélioration notable de la perception de la sécurité.» ABSTRACT: «Bicycle boulevards, defined as streets with low motorized traffic volumes and speeds where cyclists are given priority, are relatively recent additions to cycling infrastructure, particularly in Quebec, where they were incorporated into the provincial highway safety code in 2018, where they are defined as “any portion of a public road where cyclist traffic is given priority”. Despite their potential to improve cycling conditions, these facilities remain poorly understood by both cyclists and motorists. To address these challenges, the City of Montreal upgraded two existing bicycle boulevards to enhance their visibility and functionality. This study evaluates the impact of these modifications using a mixed-methods approach, combining user surveys and video-based behavioral analysis. The survey, administered before and after the improvements, revealed incremental improvements in users’ understanding and perception of bicycle boulevards. Awareness increased slightly, with 51.7 % of respondents indicating familiarity with the concept post-intervention, compared to 48.1 % before. Perceptions of cyclist priority and safety showed significant improvement, particularly among younger respondents and men. For instance, the proportion of respondents perceiving high or very high levels of safety and comfort rose from 29.0 % to 42.7 %. Notably, the share of respondents unwilling to cycle with children on a bicycle boulevard dropped from 53.4 % to 41.3 %, indicating a positive shift in perceived safety.»

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.004

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal)→French-language works237,207→