MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056840355 · doi:10.1177/0739456x07311937

The Probability of Single-family Dwelling Occupancy

2008· article· en· W2056840355 on OpenAlexaffabout
Markus Moos, Andrejs Skaburskis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Planning Education and Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Aging, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOccupancyMetropolitan areaWork (physics)CensusSocioeconomic statusDemographic economicsWorkforceConsumption (sociology)ImmigrationGeographyBusinessSocioeconomicsEconomic growthEconomicsSociologyDemographyPopulationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Changing socioeconomic conditions are increasing the flexible workforce, such as home workers that are believed to internalize the need for home-work space in their housing consumption. Analysis of census data in thirteen Canadian metropolitan areas shows that households where one or both maintainers work from home have a greater propensity to reside in larger single-family detached houses than comparable households with maintainers who commute to work. The home-work variable increases the probability of single-family dwelling occupancy more than age, immigration, and household size, demographic variables generally highly associated with single-family dwelling occupancy. Although issues of causality cannot be empirically resolved here, if home work requires more space, it is one of the factors that would influence the tendency to continue to reside in the larger single-family dwellings. These dwellings have greater environmental impacts than more compact housing types that planners promote as part of their sustainability goals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations35
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Planning Education and ResearchSame topicMigration, Aging, and Tourism StudiesFrench-language works237,207