Evolution of Daily Activity Patterns from 1971 to 1981: A Study of the Halifax Activity Panel Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Episode sequences from diaries are the richest source of information about daily activities of individuals and households available to social scientists. Their use has been advocated as an approach to urban planning that incorporates explicit consideration of the demands made by daily life on the built environment. The paper examines sequences of daily activities and activities augmented by data on their settings (including location and the presence of other people) to measure change in daily behaviour from 1971 to 1981. Diaries were supplied by respondents to the Halifax panel study carried out at Dalhousie University. Episode sequences are analysed using alignment methods, also called optimal matching, developed in molecular biology. These are implemented through the ClustalG multiple alignment program package. Alignment methods define similarity measures between character strings, which can be used to measure the similarity of two persons’ daily activities, to measure change over time, or to determine the relative similarity of three or more activity diaries. The results of the research showed that both pure activities and activity-settings identified broadly the same behvioural groupings: employed workers, domestic workers, and weekend activities. The similarity of activity patterns of individuals was greater over the ten-year analysis period than the average similarity of the sample in either 1971 or 1981. The average similarity of activity and activitysetting patterns rose from 1971 to 1981, which contradicts observations that daily routines are becoming more complex and diverse.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".