MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035007455 · doi:10.32866/001c.13207

Identifying Unmarked Crosswalks at Bus Stops in Vancouver, Canada

2020· article· en· W3035007455 on OpenAlex
Kate Hosford, Sarah Tremblay, Meghan Winters

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueFindings · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchema crosswalkPedestrianIntersection (aeronautics)Transport engineeringPedestrian crossingTransit (satellite)GeographyComputer scienceEngineeringPublic transport

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Taking transit to and from a destination typically involves crossing the street, however, not all bus stops have a marked pedestrian crossing. This study aimed to 1) identify bus stops in Vancouver, Canada with unmarked crosswalks and 2) assess whether unmarked crosswalks at bus stops are inequitably distributed across the city. Of the 1,892 bus stops in Vancouver, 8% (n=151) did not have a traffic signal or marked crosswalk at the nearest intersection. Unmarked crossings were more likely to be at bus stops in higher income neighbourhoods compared to bus stops in lower income neighbourhoods.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.278
Teacher spread0.248 · 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