Bibliographic record
Abstract
COVID-19 has had a significant impact on a global scale. Evident signs of spatial-explicit characteristics have been noted. Nevertheless, publicly available data are scarce, impeding a complete picture of the locational impacts of COVID-19. This paper aimed to assess, confirm, and validate several geographical attributes of the geography of the pandemic. A spatial modeling framework defined whether there was a clear spatial profile to COVID-19 and the key socio-economic characteristics of the distribution in Toronto. A stepwise backward regression model was generated within a geographical information systems framework to establish the key variables influencing the spread of COVID-19 in Toronto. Further to this analysis, spatial autocorrelation was performed at the global and local levels, followed by an error and lag spatial regression to understand which explanatory framework best explained disease spread. The findings support that COVID-19 is strongly spatially explicit and that geography matters in preventing spread. Social injustice, infrastructure, and neighborhood cohesion are evident characteristics of the increasing spread and incidence of COVID-19. Mitigation of incidents can be carried out by intertwining local policies with spatial monitoring strategies at the neighborhood level throughout large cities, ensuring open data and adequacy of information management within the knowledge chain.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.180 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".