<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|>You are an expert on climate change, human mobility and migration. Answer the question truthfully.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|>Here are the title and abstract of a scientific paper probably related to climate change, human mobility and migration..
Title:"COVID-19 public transit precautions: Trade-offs between risk reduction and costs."
Abstract:"Public transit has received scrutiny as a vector for spreading COVID-19 with much of the literature finding correlations between transit ridership and COVID-19 rates by assessing the role that transportation plays as a vector for human mobility in COVID-19 spread. However, most studies do not directly measure the risk of contracting COVID-19 inside the public transit vehicle. We fill a gap in the literature by comparing the risk and social costs across several modes of transportation. We develop a framework to estimate the spread of COVID-19 on transit using the bus system in Pittsburgh. We find that some trips have demand that exceed their COVID-19 passenger limit, where the driver must decide between: (1) leaving a passenger without a ride or (2) allowing them on the bus and increasing COVID-19 risk. We consider five alternatives for alleviating overcapacity: allow crowding, additional buses, longer buses as substitutes, Transportation Network Company (TNC) rides, or Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) for passed-by passengers. We use transit ridership and COVID-19 data from the spring of 2020 by combining transportation data and an epidemiological model of COVID-19 stochastically in a Monte Carlo Analysis. Our results show that 4% of county cases were contracted on the bus or from a bus rider, and a disproportionate amount (52%) were from overcapacity trips. The risk of contracting COVID-19 on the bus was low but worth mitigating. A cost-benefit analysis reveals that dispatching AVs or longer buses yield the lowest societal costs of $45 and $46 million, respectively compared to allowing crowding ($59 million).."
I have six questions you need to answer.
Q1: Is this article is about 'human migration mobility': 1 = yes; 0 = no. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q2: What drivers of migration and mobility does the article study? 0 = 'other', 1 = 'climate', 2 = 'environment', 3 = 'economic', 4 = 'conflict', 5 = 'political', 6 = 'social', 7 = 'family'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q3: What is the overall sentiment of the article?:0 = 'neutral', 1 = 'negative', 2 = 'positive'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q4: What type of climate or environmental keywords are explicitly mentioned?:  0 = 'none', 1 = 'algal blooms', 2 = 'infestation', 3 = 'infectious diseases', 4 = 'ocean acidification', 5 = 'sea ice', 6 = 'acid rain', 7 = 'drought', 8 = 'cold wave', 9 = 'heat wave', 10 = 'glacial', 11 = 'wildfire', 12 = 'air pollution', 13 = 'biodiversity loss', 14 = 'coastal erosion', 15 = 'land degradation', 16 = 'deforestation', 17 = 'desertification', 18 = 'water pollution', 19 = 'diebacks', 20 = 'permafrost loss', 21 = 'sand mining', 22 = 'sea level rise', 23 = 'earthquake', 24 = 'tsunami', 25 = 'volcanic', 26 = 'flood', 27 = 'avalanche', 28 = 'landslide', 29 = 'downburst', 30 = 'thunderstorm', 31 = 'sandstorm', 32 = 'haze', 33 = 'storm', 34 = 'cyclone', 35 = 'blizzard', 36 = 'hail', 37 = 'snow', 38 = 'tornado', 39 = 'wind', 40 = 'hurricane', 41 = 'typhoon', 42 = 'other'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q5: What discipline does the article belong to?: 0 = 'other', 1 = 'social science', 2 = 'natural science', 3 = 'arts and humanities', 4 = 'multidiscipline and interdiscipline'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q6: Does the article apply quantitative and/or statistical analysis?: 0 = 'no', 1 = 'yes'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Use the following template: 

Q1 = [];
Q2 = [];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [];
Q5 = [];
Q6 = [].<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|>Answer:
Q1 = [0];
Q2 = [];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [];
Q5 = [1];
Q6 = [1].
COVID-19 public transit precautions: Trade-offs between risk reduction and costs
Public transit has received scrutiny as a vector for spreading COVID-19 with much of the literature finding correlations between transit ridership and COVID-19 rates by assessing the role that transportation plays as a vector for human mobility in COVID-19 spread. However, most studies do not directly measure the risk of contracting COVID-19 inside the public transit vehicle. We fill a gap in the literature by comparing the risk and social costs across several modes of transportation. We develop a framework to estimate the spread of COVID-19 on transit using the bus system in Pittsburgh. We find that some trips have demand that exceed their COVID-19 passenger limit, where the driver must decide between: (1) leaving a passenger without a ride or (2) allowing them on the bus and increasing COVID-19 risk. We consider five alternatives for alleviating overcapacity: allow crowding, additional buses, longer buses as substitutes, Transportation Network Company (TNC) rides, or Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) for passed-by passengers. We use transit ridership and COVID-19 data from the spring of 2020 by combining transportation data and an epidemiological model of COVID-19 stochastically in a Monte Carlo Analysis. Our results show that 4% of county cases were contracted on the bus or from a bus rider, and a disproportionate amount (52%) were from overcapacity trips. The risk of contracting COVID-19 on the bus was low but worth mitigating. A cost-benefit analysis reveals that dispatching AVs or longer buses yield the lowest societal costs of $45 and $46 million, respectively compared to allowing crowding ($59 million).