MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982131359 · doi:10.1111/cag.12571

Bruit aérien et équité environnementale dans les quatre plus grandes métropoles canadiennes

2019· article· fr· W2982131359 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Thomas Audrin, Philippe Apparicio, Anne‐Marie Séguin, Jérémy Gelb

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Messages clés Respectivement 419 000 et 57 000 personnes résident à l'intérieur des courbes NEF 25 et NEF 30 dans les quatre RMR étudiées, soit des zones de bruit aérien assez élevé. Il y a des situations contrastées en termes d'iniquité selon les métropoles. L'iniquité quant au niveau de bruit aérien mesuré dans le milieu résidentiel est peu prononcée pour les groupes de population étudiés.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.435
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennesSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207