ArticleScientific reports2024
Evaluating the pedestrian level of service for varying trip purposes using machine learning algorithms.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Indoor Accessibility Assessment Framework Based on Multimodal Sensing and Explainable Machine Learning: A Case Study of a Tactile Museum for People with Visual Impairments.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Stacked machine learning models for accurate estimation of shear and Stoneley wave transit times in DSI log.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Advanced transport systems: the future is sustainable and technology-enabled.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The pedestrians' feeling of comfort while walking on footpaths varies according to the time of day, environment, and the purpose of the trip. The quality of service offered by pedestrian facilities such as walkways, intersections, and public places is evaluated by the Pedestrian level of service (PLOS) and has been measured from time to time, to upgrade and maintain the sustainable travel choice of people. This paper aims to focus on the level of service based on three main trip purposes such as work, education, and recreation, while considering various path characteristics and pedestrian flow characteristics that affect the pedestrian's feeling of comfort on the walkways. The data has been collected using pedestrian questionnaire surveys and pedestrian sensors in the Melbourne central business district and the significant factors that influence the PLOS for each trip purpose will be chosen using the Mutual Information gain, which is found to be different for each trip purpose. The major influencing factors that affect the PLOS will be used to develop machine learning models for three trip purposes separately using Random Forest and Light-GBM algorithm in Python. The accuracy of prediction using the light GBM model is 0.74 for education, 0.80 for recreation, and 0.70 for work trip purposes. It is found using SHAP which stands for Shapely Additive explanations that the factors such as interpersonal distance, distance from vehicles, construction sites, vehicle volume, traffic noise, and footpath surface are the most influencing variables that affect the PLOS based on three different trip purposes.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.