MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288796433

Transportation Related Social Exclusions and Homelessness: What Does the Role of Transportation Play in Improving the Circumstances of Homeless Individuals?

2016· article· en· W2288796433 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vivian Hui, Khandker Nurul Habib

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 95th Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial exclusionPovertyMetropolitan areaPopulationSociologyCriminologyEconomic growthGeographyDemographyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobility has the potential to improve the quality of life of vulnerable population segments in the society. A typical example of this is providing opportunities for homeless individuals to break free from the cycle of poverty and homelessness. Transport-related exclusion of homeless individuals is a catalytic factor for the homeless population segments in large metropolitan areas. This paper looks into the issue the role of urban transportation on state and level of complexities of homeless individuals in large urban centres by taking the City of Toronto as the study area. The research relies on a specially designed interview instrument, which encompasses both revealed preference and stated adaptation questions on travel behaviour of a sample of homeless indivduals in the City of Toronto. The qualitative results of the research identify the intricacies of transportation related social exclusions and potential to come out of the cycles of poverty and homelessness. It is clear that the relationship between transportation related social exclusions and homelessness is complex and the role of transportation on social exclusions of homeless individuals heavily depend on individual’s personal experiences.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.322 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Board 95th Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207