MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dataset: percent of population covered by local government mask orders in the US

2020· preprint· en· W3094016081 on OpenAlexaff
Philip Jacobs, Arvi Ohinmaa

Bibliographic record

VenueF1000Research · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfection Control and Ventilation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNewspaperPopulationGeographyWeb siteDemographyGovernment (linguistics)Library scienceCartographyPolitical scienceLawThe InternetComputer scienceWorld Wide WebSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a dataset covering the extent of local mask orders between April and August 2020, in states which did not have statewide orders (and hence 100% coverage). We obtained data from national and regional newspaper and broadcaster web-based articles, and city and county web pages. The information that we abstracted included: city or county of ordinance, date that the ordinance took effect, and the population of the city or county. In 14 states, city or county governments issued mask-wearing orders, and from our dataset it can been seen that the median population covered in the states was 37.5%; the coverage ranged from 1.6% (New Hampshire) to 77.1% (Arizona). The dataset can be accessed from: https://doi.org/10.7939/DVN/A9C1UU.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.642

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueF1000ResearchSame topicInfection Control and VentilationFrench-language works237,207