MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111885837 · doi:10.32866/001c.18066

Travel Survey Recruitment Through Facebook and Transit app: Lessons from COVID-19

2020· article· en· W3111885837 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueFindings · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographicsSample (material)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Smartphone appSurvey data collectionBusinessTransit (satellite)Survey samplingAdvertisingPublic transportGeographyTransport engineeringInternet privacyComputer scienceEngineeringMedicineDemographyStatisticsEnvironmental healthSociologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We compare the results of a survey of transit riders during COVID-19 against a regional household travel survey. The Facebook sample over-represents women and car-less respondents compared to the household survey. We also compare the demographics of a subset of Facebook survey respondents, those still riding transit during COVID-19, against a similar survey conducted by Transit app of its users. The picture of post-COVID transit riders is older and of higher incomes in the Facebook sample compared to the Transit app sample. Finally, we replicate a model of vehicle ownership produced with the household travel survey using the Facebook survey.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.282
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.113 · 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