MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134458388 · doi:10.1159/000513762

Bringing the “Place” to Life-Space in Gerontology Research

2021· article· en· W3134458388 on OpenAlexaff
Sayeh Bayat, Michael J. Widener, Alex Mihailidis

Bibliographic record

VenueGerontology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpace (punctuation)SophisticationSubject (documents)GerontologyPsychologyLevel designSociologyComputer scienceMedicineSocial scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding older adults' relationships with their environments and the way this relationship evolves over time have been increasingly acknowledged in gerontological research. This relationship is often measured in terms of life-space, defined as the spatial area through which a person moves within a specific period of time. Life-space is traditionally reported using questionnaires or travel diaries and is, thus, subject to inaccuracies. More recently, studies are using a global positioning system to accurately measure life-space. Although life-space provides useful insights into older adults' relationships with their environment, it does not capture the inherent complexities of environmental exposures. In the fields of travel behaviour and health geography, a substantial amount of research has looked at people's spatial behaviour using the notion of "Activity Space," allowing for increasing sophistication in understanding older adults' experience of their environment. This manuscript discusses developments and directions for extending the life-space framework in environmental gerontology by drawing on the advancements in the activity space framework.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.265 · 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.

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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGerontologySame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207