Bibliographic record
Abstract
The day-to-day mobility of the elderly is a major issue in Western societies. The percentage of seniors in the population is increasing and their presence is visible in all urban areas, including in North America’s first-generation suburbs built in the 1950s. These residential areas, originally designed and developed for families with cars, present several functional problems for people who are growing old there. Nevertheless, a very large majority of them aspire to stay in these areas as long as possible. The day-to-day obstacles are offset by their strong attachment to the neighbourhood. Few studies have looked at the changes over time of these residential aspirations, however. The travel habits of seniors are better and better documented, but tend to focus on the concept of trips. The interpretation of the variables quantifying travel is rendered difficulty bythe high variability of individual daily mobility and changing patternsas individuals age. Qualitative studies show that theprospect of no longer being able to drive is hard to cope with, especially in the suburbs. A small number of trips should not necessarily be associated with social isolation. Old people show both a strong desire and a strong ability to adapt. Yet their residential aspirations and changing relationship to geographical space in general and to means of transport in particular have not been monitored over time. It is from this perspective that this longitudinal doctoral research project explored the relationship between residential and daily mobility of a group of 102 suburban residents aged between 61 and 90. Residing in the Quebecconurbation in Canada, the respondents were consulted twice, in 1999 and 2006. This study combined quantitative and qualitative methods by using techniques of spatial analysis to explore the complexity of mobility in old age.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".