MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966621010 · doi:10.1068/b3023

The Impact of Surrounding Land Use and Vegetation on Single-Family House Prices

2004· article· en· W1966621010 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yan Kestens, Marius Thériault, François Des Rosiers

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning B Planning and Design · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZoningLand useVegetation (pathology)Spatial analysisGeographyBuilt environmentExternalitySpatial heterogeneityEnvironmental resource managementEconometricsEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingEconomicsCivil engineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this paper is to assess the marginal effect of land-use locational externalities on the sale price of single-family houses, considering various spatial scales—in accordance with perception theories—and trade-off with accessibility to the city centre. From land-use and vegetation data derived from aerial photographs and Landsat TM satellite images, two sets of hedonic models, using OLS regression, are built from two samples of single-family properties sold in Quebec City. A standard model integrates property-specific factors, census factors, accessibility, and location attributes. In a second model, land-use and vegetation variables are considered on various spatial scales; a third step introduces the interaction effect of the surrounding land use with location, with car-time distance to the main activity centres being used as the main indicator. This allows for an analysis of the spatial variation of the environmental impact throughout the city considering relative proximity to the centre. The successful integration of environmental variables concerning location enhances our understanding of the local land-use and vegetation effects. It also improves the overall performance of the model while virtually removing spatial autocorrelation among residuals. Such models could be used in order to assess the fiscal impacts of various land zoning by law policies, thereby providing planning administrations with a useful decisionmaking tool.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.154 · 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

Citations112
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning B Planning and DesignSame topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207