MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Urban Form and Household Activity‐Travel Behavior

2006· article· en· W2084464213 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGrowth and Change · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaUrban sprawlTravel behaviorGeographyLand useTraffic congestionSpatial mismatchUrban planningEconomic geographyEnvironmental planningTransport engineeringBusinessEconomic growthEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Cities and metropolitan regions face several challenges including urban sprawl, auto dependence and congestion, and related environmental and human health effects. Examining the spatial characteristics of daily household activity‐travel behavior holds important implications for understanding and addressing urban transportation issues. Research of this sort can inform development of urban land use policy that encourages the use of local opportunities, potentially leading to reduced motorized travel. This article examines the potential household activity‐travel response to a planned metropolitan polycentric hierarchy of activity centers. Behavioral observations have been drawn from an activity‐travel survey conducted in the Portland, Oregon, metropolitan area during the mid‐1990s. Evidence presented from exploratory analysis indicates an urban/suburban differential, with less daily travel and smaller activity spaces for urban households. Investigation of the travel reduction potential of the proposed land‐use strategy suggests that location effects could be offset by adjustments to household sociodemographic and mobility characteristics.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.218 · 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