MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2197081692

Access to Primary Schools and House Values: Testing the Spatial Homogeneity of Hedonic Prices

2007· preprint· en· W2197081692 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
François Des Rosiers, Marius Thériault, Marius Thériault Marion Voisin, Marion Voisin

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2007
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyNeighbourhood (mathematics)Property valueHomogeneity (statistics)Residential propertyEconometricsSpatial analysisStatisticsEconomic geographyMathematicsBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the mid 1970s, the impact of nearby schools on property values has been a major theme in the North-American literature, with most studies focusing on the influence of school quality. To a lesser extent, the impact proximity to school exerts on house prices has also been investigated together with the way the urban environment and distances to school affect student modal choices. Using the hedonic approach, this paper aims at assessing the price effect ensuing from proximity of, and accessibility to, the nearest primary school based on a sample of 8,285 single-family houses sold over the 1993-1996 period in Quebec City, Canada. While home-to-school walking distances are computed for properties located within one kilometre ñ a distance beyond which a school bus service is provided, car travel times measured on the 1994 GIS-operated topological street network are used for houses located further away from school. Main property features as well as neighbourhood and household descriptors are used as control variables in the model, with four urbanization patterns being distinguished on the grounds of residential densities. A major objective of this study is to test the spatial homogeneity of hedonic prices with respect to primary schools. In order to do so, the OLS method, Cassettiís expansion method and the geographically weighted regression (GWR) method are compared. Each method is assessed in regard to its ability to account for, and deal with, the presence of spatial autocorrelation in the residuals while bringing out spatial shifts in household preferences.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics→Same topicHousing Market and Economics→French-language works237,207→