Geographically and temporally weighted regression for modeling spatio-temporal variation in house prices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By incorporating temporal effects into the geographically weighted regression (GWR) model, an extended GWR model, geographically and temporally weighted regression (GTWR), has been developed to deal with both spatial and temporal nonstationarity simultaneously in real estate market data. Unlike the standard GWR model, GTWR integrates both temporal and spatial information in the weighting matrices to capture spatial and temporal heterogeneity. The GTWR design embodies a local weighting scheme wherein GWR and temporally weighted regression (TWR) become special cases of GTWR. In order to test its improved performance, GTWR was compared with global ordinary least squares, TWR, and GWR in terms of goodness-of-fit and other statistical measures using a case study of residential housing sales in the city of Calgary, Canada, from 2002 to 2004. The results showed that there were substantial benefits in modeling both spatial and temporal nonstationarity simultaneously. In the test sample, the TWR, GWR, and GTWR models, respectively, reduced absolute errors by 3.5%, 31.5%, and 46.4% relative to a global ordinary least squares model. More impressively, the GTWR model demonstrated a better goodness-of-fit (0.9282) than the TWR model (0.7794) and the GWR model (0.8897). McNamara's test supported the hypothesis that the improvements made by GTWR over the TWR and GWR models are statistically significant for the sample data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".