Mapping the intellectual structure of GIS-T field (2008–2019): a dynamic co-word analysis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Using geographic information systems (GIS) widely for dealing with transportation problems (is well-known as GIS-T), has made it nessasary for researchers to discover the current state-of-the-art and predict the trends of future research. This paper aims to contribute to a better understanding of GIS-T research area from a longitudinal perspective, over the period 2008–2019. A co-word analysis was used to illustrate all the underlying subfields of GIS-T based on published papers in the Web of Science (WoS) database service. The main knowledge areas representing the intellectual structure of GIS-T including (a) sustainability, (b) health, (c) planning and management, and (d) methods and tools, were detected. Finally, in order to illustrate the structure and development of the identified clusters, two-dimensional maps and strategic diagrams for each period were drawn. This study is the first attempt to employ a text mining method so as to detect the conceptual structure of GIS-T research area from a complex and interdisciplinary literature.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.082 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it