Overview
City material frames Smart Streets as a bounded learning program using sensors and transportation data. It is a useful case for evaluating whether experimental street technology changes maintenance, safety, or mobility decisions.
Published city description
Boston's Smart Streets work applies sensors and analytics to roadway safety and multimodal movement.
Program status
Boston is an established city and Smart Streets is a program within its transport work, not a citywide operating system.
Technology and data
Sensors and mobility observations can describe vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian movement. Coverage, weather effects, calibration, and retention rules shape the evidence.
Analytics and decisions
Computer vision, time-series analysis, and geospatial methods are relevant, but any claimed deployment or result must remain tied to the city's documentation.
Evidence boundary
Review should identify active locations, operating partners, privacy controls, and whether measured changes are attributable to the program.
Authoritative published assessment · v0.2.3
Classification · 2B
Type Score 13.75 / 100 · Autonomy Score 6.88 / 100
Research edition 2026-10-11-chatgpt-draft-four-2026-10-11-v1 · assessment 2026-10-11.
Eight equally weighted service domains use separate Type and Autonomy maxima. Scores and domain-count gates jointly determine the classification. Source limitations and coverage inferences remain part of this assessment.
Eight-domain decisions
| Domain | Type winner · T · coverage | Autonomy winner · A · coverage | Type / Autonomy points | Evidence and qualification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MOB | Project Green Light AI-assisted signal-timing optimization · 2 · Coverage: N (0.65) | Project Green Light AI-assisted signal-timing optimization · 1 · Coverage: N (0.65) | 5.41666667 / 2.70833333 | selected highest qualified contribution in each score dimension Provisional supplied evidence judgments and coverage assumptions retained.
|
| ENG | Unknown · ? · Coverage: Unknown — not scored | Unknown · ? · Coverage: Unknown — not scored | 0.00000000 / 0.00000000 | no verified eligible city-scale deployment; documented lower bound not absence Provisional supplied evidence judgments and coverage assumptions retained. |
| WAT | Unknown · ? · Coverage: Unknown — not scored | Unknown · ? · Coverage: Unknown — not scored | 0.00000000 / 0.00000000 | no verified eligible city-scale deployment; documented lower bound not absence Provisional supplied evidence judgments and coverage assumptions retained. |
| BLD | Unknown · ? · Coverage: Unknown — not scored | Unknown · ? · Coverage: Unknown — not scored | 0.00000000 / 0.00000000 | no verified eligible city-scale deployment; documented lower bound not absence Provisional supplied evidence judgments and coverage assumptions retained. |
| SAF | Unknown · ? · Coverage: Unknown — not scored | Unknown · ? · Coverage: Unknown — not scored | 0.00000000 / 0.00000000 | no verified eligible city-scale deployment; documented lower bound not absence Provisional supplied evidence judgments and coverage assumptions retained. |
| ENV | Unknown · ? · Coverage: Unknown — not scored | Unknown · ? · Coverage: Unknown — not scored | 0.00000000 / 0.00000000 | no verified eligible city-scale deployment; documented lower bound not absence Provisional supplied evidence judgments and coverage assumptions retained. |
| GOV | Citywide BWSC predictive flood inundation/planning model · 2 · Coverage: W (1) | Citywide BWSC predictive flood inundation/planning model · 1 · Coverage: W (1) | 8.33333333 / 4.16666667 | selected highest qualified contribution in each score dimension Provisional supplied evidence judgments and coverage assumptions retained.
|
| HLT | Unknown · ? · Coverage: Unknown — not scored | Unknown · ? · Coverage: Unknown — not scored | 0.00000000 / 0.00000000 | no verified eligible city-scale deployment; documented lower bound not absence Provisional supplied evidence judgments and coverage assumptions retained. |
Eligible domain counts: T1+ 2; T2+ 2; T3 0; A1+ 2; A2+ 0; A3 0.
Smart technology inventory
Current winners and documented deployment evidence are reconciled below. Earlier screening records labeled Unclear do not establish deployment and do not contribute to scores.
| Technology / catalog reference | Domain | Status · coverage | Evidence and limitations |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project Green Light AI-assisted signal-timing optimizationTECH-001 | MOB | Deployed / operational · N | Original operating status: operating production 114 retimed intersections across 20 neighborhoods. City staff approve/install timing plans. Not closed-loop autonomous actuation. Municipal scoring eligibility g=1; T=2; A=1; coverage c=0.65 Recorded operating deployment
|
| Citywide BWSC predictive flood inundation/planning modelTECH-002 | GOV | Deployed / operational · W | Original operating status: operating production Hydrologic and hydraulic scenario simulations support planning agencies; broad City 1D and high-risk 2D. Primary GOV planning-digital-twin analog; no second WAT credit. Municipal scoring eligibility g=1; T=2; A=1; coverage c=1 Recorded operating deployment
|
| Boston CityScore performance monitoring platformTECH-003 | GOV | Deployed / operational · W | Original operating status: operating production Current metrics for city leaders; operational measurement but does not independently produce predictive models or action selection. Municipal scoring eligibility g=1; T=1; A=0; coverage c=1 Recorded operating deployment · Best-evidence inference / additional verification required · Historical evidence carried forward
|
| MBTA real-time arrival prediction servicesTECH-004 | MOB | unverified details · N | Original operating status: unverified details MBTA portal inaccessible; not scored until full claim-level examination confirms deployments and city-serving coverage. Municipal scoring eligibility g=0; T=; A=; coverage c=0.65 Unverified, excluded, pilot, or unclear technology — not an established scoring deployment · Best-evidence inference / additional verification required · Original source inaccessible
|
| Gunshot acoustical sensing/ShotSpotterTECH-005 | SAF | Deployed / operational · D | Original operating status: operating production Detection not operational independent action choice; in-city geographic extent and share unverified; conservative D. Municipal scoring eligibility g=0; T=1; A=0; coverage c=0.35 Recorded operating deployment
|
| Common SENSES community environmental monitor networkTECH-006 | ENV | Deployed / operational · D | Original operating status: operating production 75 sensors deployed in Blue Hill Avenue corridor across two neighborhoods, meaningful local project but not N city scale. Municipal scoring eligibility g=0; T=1; A=0; coverage c=0.35 Recorded operating deployment
|
| Statewide utility grid modernization/AMITECH-007 | ENG | unverified Boston footprint · P | Original operating status: unverified Boston footprint General state-level hardware does not establish significant operating deployment specifically within Boston. Municipal scoring eligibility g=0; T=; A=; coverage c=0.15 Unverified, excluded, pilot, or unclear technology — not an established scoring deployment
|
| BWSC smart sewer operational sensing upgradesTECH-008 | WAT | unverified/planning · P | Original operating status: unverified/planning Source not examined; no operating-scale support; separate from BWSC flood planning model. Municipal scoring eligibility g=0; T=; A=; coverage c=0.15 Unverified, excluded, pilot, or unclear technology — not an established scoring deployment
|
| Boston municipal public WiFi networkTECH-009 | BLD | unverified service footprint · P | Original operating status: unverified service footprint Cross-cutting connectivity/infrastructure candidate; no verified broad city-scale service distribution/penetration. Municipal scoring eligibility g=0; T=1; A=0; coverage c=0.15 Unverified, excluded, pilot, or unclear technology — not an established scoring deployment
|
| BPD drone as first responder pilotTECH-010 | SAF | pilot/trial · P | Original operating status: pilot/trial Pilot evidence is retained; not scored as city-scale autonomous emergency response. Municipal scoring eligibility g=0; T=1; A=0; coverage c=0.15 Unverified, excluded, pilot, or unclear technology — not an established scoring deployment
|
| Boston AI-assisted city website search betaTECH-011 | GOV | pilot/beta · P | Original operating status: pilot/beta Generative help searching city services, lacks material user population and decision-authority evidence. Municipal scoring eligibility g=0; T=2; A=1; coverage c=0.15 Unverified, excluded, pilot, or unclear technology — not an established scoring deployment
|
68-pattern research audit · unknown does not mean absent
Original stage labels are preserved. Unverified patterns are research audit entries, not deployments.
[]
Sources and evidence
Each canonical publication URL appears once in this group. Reference aliases and research stages do not count as independent corroboration.
- City of Boston ↗
Direct city documentation: 114 implemented AI-recommended retimings in 20 Boston neighborhoods; city engineers select/apply changes; count != all-signal share
Original source examined in the supplied research record
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-001 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · accepted
- Boston Water and Sewer Commission ↗
Official citywide flood scenario model; not live emergency forecasting
Original source examined in the supplied research record
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-002 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · accepted
- Boston Water and Sewer Commission ↗
Full city drainage simulated 1D, vulnerable areas 2D, predictive planning inputs used by several city agencies; not prediction of a specified future event
Original source examined in the supplied research record
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-003 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · accepted
- Boston Water and Sewer Commission ↗
Updated modeling scenarios with adaptation assessment; explanatory limitation on forecast scope
Original source examined in the supplied research record
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-004 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · accepted
- Boston Water and Sewer Commission and Hazen and Sawyer ↗
Independent service assessment used data by multiple city agencies; same BWSC publisher family, not independent corroboration
Original source examined in the supplied research record
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-005 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · accepted
- City of Boston ↗
Current published KPIs for city government; monitoring not predictive action selection
Original source examined in the supplied research record
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-006 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · accepted
- City of Boston Office of Emerging Technology ↗
75 deployed sensors: 24 air and 51 heat/noise along Blue Hill Avenue in Roxbury/Dorchester; operating but localized
Original source examined in the supplied research record
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-007 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · accepted
- City of Boston Office of Emerging Technology ↗
Confirms deployed community network restricted to Blue Hill Ave corridor; no citywide ENV rating
Original source examined in the supplied research record
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-008 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · accepted
- Boston Police Department ↗
BPD deployed acoustic gunshot location service; precise geographic coverage and station/zone denominator unspecified
Original source examined in the supplied research record
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-009 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · accepted
- Boston Police Department ↗
Current pilot not material citywide production or independently goal-optimizing emergency-service network
Original source examined in the supplied research record
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-010 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · accepted
- City of Boston ↗
City lists Curb Lab exploration and AI public search, but these are not independently verified high-scale production programs
Original source examined in the supplied research record
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-011 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · accepted
- City of Boston Emergency Management ↗
Confirms recent update to citywide 2D predictive model to simulate coastal stormwater adaptations, not real-time automatic flood response
Original source examined in the supplied research record
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-012 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · accepted
- MBTA ↗
MBTA site blocked direct tool retrieval; snippets alone do not count as examined; no independent scoring credit awarded
Inaccessible original source
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-013 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · inaccessible
- Eversource ↗
Statewide upgrades do not establish an in-Boston denominator; full primary source not independently substantively examined in current pass
Original source not examined — discovery or excerpt only
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-014 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · not_yet_examined
- Boston Water and Sewer Commission ↗
Potential citywide smart monitoring aspiration from search excerpt; inspect actual document before scoring
Original source not examined — discovery or excerpt only
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-015 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · not_yet_examined
- City of Boston ↗
Website direct fetch failed; do not infer municipal multi-area N coverage for BLD from summary count alone
Inaccessible original source
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-016 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · inaccessible
- BWSC ↗
Updated model link and original studies; BWSC publisher family shared with SRC-002–005, not distinct corroboration
Original source examined in the supplied research record
Evidence IDs, provenance and review states (1)
- SRC-017 · Supplied ChatGPT research · 2026-10-11 · accepted
Claim-level evidence ledger (17)
| Evidence ID / technologies | Claim and original state | Sources |
|---|---|---|
| EV-001 TECH-001 | 114 signal intersections actually retimed across 20 neighborhoods since 2024 by City staff using Google recommendations accepted |
|
| EV-002 TECH-001 | Google models traffic patterns and recommends timing plans; City Traffic Management Center changes signals; A1, not A2 accepted |
|
| EV-003 TECH-001 | 114 intersections spatially distributed across twenty named neighborhoods; all-city denominator and daily vehicle share missing uncertain |
|
| EV-004 TECH-002 | Citywide model simulates flooding under storm/sea-level scenarios, maps affected buildings and facilities accepted |
|
| EV-005 TECH-002 | Model data used for planning by several city agencies; retrospective/planning scenario predictions; A1 for human planning accepted |
|
| EV-006 TECH-002 | Full city 1D drainage and priority locations 2D, model later updated to simulate proposed interventions accepted |
|
| EV-007 TECH-002 | Models explicitly not for predicted specific future events or for emergency action; not closed-loop real-time emergency response accepted |
|
| EV-008 TECH-003 | CityScore refreshed daily/weekly/monthly city KPIs and management view; Type1 but no unassisted algorithmic action accepted |
|
| EV-009 TECH-005 | Acoustic detection deployed by police, notifying of firearm discharges accepted |
|
| EV-010 TECH-005 | Geo coverage numerator and eligible area denominator unavailable; no N gate uncertain |
|
| EV-011 TECH-006 | 75 installed operating monitors in Roxbury/Dorchester corridor, not citywide scale accepted |
|
| EV-012 TECH-010 | Drone first-response described as a pilot; no municipal-scale qualification accepted |
|
| EV-013 TECH-011 | City government has AI answer search beta; limited release and governance constrain qualification accepted |
|
| EV-014 TECH-004 | Developer portal inaccessible; do not score based solely on snippet uncertain |
|
| EV-015 TECH-007 | Statewide utility modernization does not prove Boston municipal footprint uncertain |
|
| EV-016 TECH-008 | Budget proposal cannot prove active citywide sewer sensor service uncertain |
|
| EV-017 TECH-009 | Public WiFi population/geographic denominator not established uncertain |
|
Boston research report
Boston is classified 2B with Type Score 13.75 and Autonomy Score 6.88, under v0.2.3. The eight-domain decisions, deployment inventory and source review states above form this edition's reproducible assessment.
Limitations
- Provisional research only: source acceptance and contextual autonomy are supplied research judgments, not renewed source verification.
- SRC-013: inaccessible — MBTA site blocked direct tool retrieval; snippets alone do not count as examined; no independent scoring credit awarded
- SRC-014: not_yet_examined — Statewide upgrades do not establish an in-Boston denominator; full primary source not independently substantively examined in current pass
- SRC-015: not_yet_examined — Potential citywide smart monitoring aspiration from search excerpt; inspect actual document before scoring
- SRC-016: inaccessible — Website direct fetch failed; do not infer municipal multi-area N coverage for BLD from summary count alone
- EDITORIAL REVIEW: 2B depends on BWSC long-range flood scenario model qualifying as operating GOV Type 2. It is not a live flood forecast or autonomous control. Green Light N coverage also needs a municipal denominator. Boston CSV contributions are rounded to 8 decimals; exact T/A/c/g inputs retained separately.
- No per-technology 21-domain capability tags were supplied. Original descriptive fields retained; no tags inferred. Eight weighted service domains remain separate.
- Duplicate identity retained without merge/delete: [{"id":29322,"slug":"boston","country":"USA","publicationStatus":"published"}]
- Some deployments have no unambiguous shared-catalog match. Kept as research deployment records; no duplicate definitions created.
- MOB: selected highest qualified contribution in each score dimension Provisional supplied evidence judgments and coverage assumptions retained.
- GOV: selected highest qualified contribution in each score dimension Provisional supplied evidence judgments and coverage assumptions retained.
Supplied research report archive · original wording preserved
# Boston, Massachusetts — Smart City Dispatch v0.2.3 provisional assessment **Research date:** 2026-10-11 **City proper:** Municipal Boston, not Cambridge, Quincy, all Greater Boston, or every MBTA/Eversource regional asset. **Provisional class:** **2B**; Type **13.75** and Autonomy **6.88**. **Editorial status:** DRAFT; do not publish or revise live classification without editor authorization. ## Executive judgment Boston qualifies provisionally as **Intelligent / human-guided (2B)** in two independent, qualified domains. The City has actually implemented 114 AI-recommended traffic light timing adjustments across 20 neighborhoods. Separately, Boston Water and Sewer Commission (BWSC) maintains flood-inundation scenario models that simulate impacts citywide and inform several city agencies’ planning decisions. Despite intelligent recommendations, neither application demonstrates independently choosing and executing operational actions in closed feedback loops across two materially operating city-scale domains. In particular, the flood model is **not a real-time emergency warning forecast**. **The source register is not complete coverage of the municipality's technology portfolio.** Type/Autonomy totals are source-backed documented lower bounds; the classification can change after deeper review of energy, water and public safety technologies. ## Domain winners and site coverage | Domain | Technology and evidence | T | A | c | g | Type pts | Autonomy pts | |---|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:| | MOB | 114 AI-assisted traffic signal retimings across 20 neighborhoods, SRC-001 | 2 | 1 | 0.65 | 1 | 5.416667 | 2.708333 | | GOV | BWSC citywide model used for multi-agency hazard planning, SRC-002–005,012,017 | 2 | 1 | 1.00 | 1 | 8.333333 | 4.166667 | | ENG, WAT, BLD, SAF, ENV, HLT | no qualifying verified N/W contributor | ? | ? | — | 0 | 0 evidence-bound | 0 evidence-bound | | **Total** | | | | | | **13.750000** | **6.875000** | **Important:** The BWSC model's primary scoring domain is **GOV** as a citywide intelligent government-planning system (conditional digital-twin/planning pattern analogous to SCD-TP-054). It is **not** credited again in WAT or SAF. Its spatial reach does not prove citywide active flood-warning service, automated pumps, or live weather prediction. The limited ENV sensors do not qualify for citywide score. ## System-specific findings **MOB / Project Green Light:** City of Boston reports 114 intersections whose signal plans the City implemented following Google AI modeling across 20 neighborhoods. This is meaningful across-neighborhood N=0.65 network, not all Boston intersections or proven trip share. The City’s own staff use recommendations and adjust existing signal timing. T=2 (intelligent recommendations), A=1 (human authorization). Not A2/C because software does not autonomously select and execute actions end to end. Relevant latest source SRC-001. **GOV / BWSC predictive planning model:** Source SRC-003 explicitly says model data used for planning by several city agencies, the entire city is modeled 1D, flood-vulnerable portions modeled 2D. BWSC has updated 2D simulation of coastal stormwater adaptations. It predicts scenarios and informs human-led long-range choices. Provisional T=2/A=1 W=1.0. The BWSC warning says it must not be used to forecast particular future emergency events. This is citywide *analytical geographic reach*, not continuous live infrastructure sensing or autonomous flood actuation. If City reviewer believes static historical scenario model cannot meet ongoing operating Type 2, drop GOV to alternative CityScore Type 1 and recalculate before approval. **GOV / CityScore:** Citywide continuously refreshed municipal KPI dashboard Type=1/A=0; present but loses GOV maximum to BWSC scenario model. A dashboard without actionable AI-derived recommendations is not A1 by itself. **ENV / Common SENSES:** 24 air sensors and 51 heat/noise sensors were installed along Blue Hill Avenue (Roxbury, Dorchester) and provide accessible data. Geographic scope is a community corridor, coded D=0.35/g=0; no municipality-wide contribution regardless of sensor count. **SAF / ShotSpotter:** Operated by BPD, but the city's material coverage fraction cannot be proven from cited page, so no N/W service-scale gate. It provides sensing and notification, not independent resource-action choice. The 2026 drone responder program is a pilot and excluded. **ENG/WAT/BLD:** No verified Boston city-specific utility smart-meter footprint, operating smart-sewer monitoring network, or N/W public WiFi denominator. These domains remain unknown, not absent. **MOB / MBTA:** Regional rapid-transit prediction services are relevant, but the developer API documentation was not substantively retrievable in this review; no second MOB credit or independent scale claim. Re-evaluate with MBTA operator sources later. ## Seven-part Level C assessment 1. Sensing/state: Green Light uses traffic trends to model timing; flood model uses historical rainfall, sea level, hydrologic scenarios. 2. Alternatives: Signal timings are AI-proposed, flood impacts modeled for multiple storm scenarios. 3. Delegation: City engineers make the retiming decisions; BWSC/government humans make capital/planning decisions. 4. Execution: Signal timing is implemented by humans in operations; inundation model does not automatically actuate city assets. 5. Feedback: No source-verified autonomous perception–choice–actuation–outcome feedback loop across two independent domains. 6. Operating scale: MOB N provisional; GOV W for shared planning model; no municipal two-domain autonomous operation. 7. Independent checks: primary operators' statements are substantiated; fuller independent comparative metrics needed before public editorial approval. ## Gate tests - Type 1: numerical threshold 5 and 2 distinct T>=1 domains = PASS. - Type 2: numerical threshold 10 and 2 distinct T>=2 domains (MOB,GOV) = PASS (conditional GOV scenario qualification). - Type 3: threshold 30 and 3 qualified T3 goal-directed domains = FAIL. - Level B: numerical threshold 2.5 and actionable human AI assistance = PASS. - Level C: threshold 10 and 2 A2 independent operation domains = FAIL (score 6.875; 0 A2 domains). - Level D: threshold 30 and 3 A3 independently goal-directed domains = FAIL. ## Sensitivity If BWSC scenario planning is classified GOV T=1/A=0 (CityScore fallback), Type drops from 13.75 to **9.58** and Autonomy drops to **2.71**. That would meet Type 1, not Type 2, so **1B**, conditional on retaining city material MOB and GOV coverage. Thus Boston's Type 2 conclusion hinges on the editorial test of model usage, not a numeric manipulation. If Green Light fails N coverage verification despite the 114 operating sites across 20 neighborhoods, 2-domain breadth fails and classification becomes evidence-insufficient pending further research, not 0A. ## Audit and remaining work 17 URLs discovered; 13 examined with accepted material claims including important exclusion claims; 2 inaccessible; 2 not yet examined; 7 unique publisher families in accepted list. Multiple BWSC pages are the **same primary organizational publisher**; municipal pages often overlap; number of web URLs does not imply independent corroboration. Source-original URLs, states and reasons are in `source_register.csv`. Open issues: Geospatial distribution/all-city denominator of 114 signals; municipal planning use and currency of inundation model; third-party corroboration of performance; completion and Boston specific count of utility AMI; utility/smart stormwater control production status; ShotSpotter municipal sensor coverage; MBTA operator primary evidence; potential duplicated Boston records in SCD City Atlas. ### Sources prioritized - City of Boston — Project Green Light (SRC-001): https://search.boston.gov/news/mayor-wu-announces-expansion-project-green-light-signal-optimization-program - Boston Water and Sewer Commission — official Inundation Model (SRC-002): https://www.bwsc.org/boston-inundation-model - BWSC — complete technical description and limitation (SRC-003): https://www.bwscstormviewer.com/inundation-model - City of Boston — updated 2D flood model (SRC-012): https://content.boston.gov/departments/emergency-management/what-city-doing-about-flooding - Boston.gov — CityScore (SRC-006): https://www.boston.gov/departments/analytics-team/cityscore - Boston.gov — completed Common SENSES (SRC-007): https://www.boston.gov/news/bostons-newest-environmental-sensor-network-complete This dossier is an evidence-supported and reproducible **research scenario**, not a directive to overwrite an existing published page. When creating a later Sites import for this assessment, find/correct the duplicate Boston record BEFORE proposing any publication.
Technology record
Related city profiles
Related Daily Signals
Sources (31)
- 01City of Boston — Smart Streets ↗
- 02City of Boston — Smart Streets ↗
- 03City of Boston — Numina street sensors and data ↗
- 04City of Boston — Beta Blocks ↗
- 05City of Boston — Vision Zero ↗
- 06City of Boston Office of Emerging Technology · SRC-007 (accepted) ↗
- 07Smart Streets | Boston.gov ↗
- 08AI-RELATED Projects at the City of Boston | Boston.gov ↗
- 09Emerging Technology | Boston.gov ↗
- 10Autonomous vehicles: Boston’s approach | Boston.gov ↗
- 11Environmental Sensors | Boston.gov ↗
- 12City of Boston Office of Emerging Technology · SRC-008 (accepted) ↗
- 13Lunchbox of Sensors | Boston.gov ↗
- 14Clean Air in Boston | Boston.gov ↗
- 15More safety details ↗
- 16Executive order on autonomous vehicles in Boston ↗
- 17City of Boston · SRC-001 (accepted) ↗
- 18Boston Water and Sewer Commission · SRC-002 (accepted) ↗
- 19Boston Water and Sewer Commission · SRC-003 (accepted) ↗
- 20Boston Water and Sewer Commission · SRC-004 (accepted) ↗
- 21Boston Water and Sewer Commission and Hazen and Sawyer · SRC-005 (accepted) ↗
- 22City of Boston · SRC-006 (accepted) ↗
- 23Boston Police Department · SRC-009 (accepted) ↗
- 24Boston Police Department · SRC-010 (accepted) ↗
- 25City of Boston · SRC-011 (accepted) ↗
- 26City of Boston Emergency Management · SRC-012 (accepted) ↗
- 27MBTA · SRC-013 (inaccessible) ↗
- 28Eversource · SRC-014 (not_yet_examined) ↗
- 29Boston Water and Sewer Commission · SRC-015 (not_yet_examined) ↗
- 30City of Boston · SRC-016 (inaccessible) ↗
- 31BWSC · SRC-017 (accepted) ↗
How SCD classifies cities
Review the classification methodology, see the calculation method, or classify a city.