MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2099446200 · doi:10.3141/2255-08

Modeling of Job Mobility and Location Choice Decisions

2011· article· en· W2099446200 on OpenAlexaffabout
Muhammad Ahsanul Habib, Eric J. Miller, Bruce T. Mans

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrosimulationComponent (thermodynamics)Discrete choiceUnemploymentEconometricsComputer scienceMixed logitDuration (music)LogitTravel behaviorTravel surveyOperations researchEconomicsTransport engineeringLogistic regressionMicroeconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a comprehensive framework for modeling continuous decisions about changing jobs that individuals make over the course of their lives. The key objective of the research was to develop disaggregate econometric models for decision making about job mobility and location choice to implement longitudinal job mobility behavior of people within a dynamic microsimulation-based integrated urban modeling system. The paper includes two behavioral model components: (a) a job mobility model and (b) a job location choice model. The models were implemented empirically with a retrospective survey of the greater Toronto and Hamilton area in Ontario, Canada. The first component investigated the timing of job mobility with the use of a competing risk duration modeling approach for four event types: a job switch, a return to school, short-term unemployment, and withdrawal from the labor force. The second component, job location choice, was empirically estimated by applying the discrete choice methodology. One of the key features of the model was that it examined the influence of current employment in making decisions about the next job location and specified a gain–loss utility structure by the prospect–theoretic, reference-dependent choice modeling approach. A mixed logit model was developed to account for unobserved heterogeneity in the location preferences. These models were expected to be implemented in the Integrated Land Use, Transportation, Environment (ILUTE) modeling system, which had recently been updated with comparable disaggregate behavioral residential location models.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.234
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations16
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board→Same topicUrban Transport and Accessibility→French-language works237,207→