MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135754616 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0247996

Analysis of mobility homophily in Stockholm based on social network data

2021· article· en· W3135754616 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Cate Heine, Paolo Santi, Marcus Sundberg, Miriam Nordfors, Carlo Ratti

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTeck ResourcesHorizon 2020Horizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeKungliga Tekniska HögskolanFondazione Centro Studi EnelGoverno BrasilFord Foundation
KeywordsHomophilySocioeconomic statusProxy (statistics)Similarity (geometry)Metric (unit)Geographical distanceGeographySocial network (sociolinguistics)DemographySocial mediaComputer scienceSociologyStatisticsWorld Wide WebMathematicsEconomicsPopulationSocial scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a novel metric for measuring relative connection between parts of a city using geotagged Twitter data as a proxy for co-occurrence of city residents. We find that socioeconomic similarity is a significant predictor of this connectivity metric, which we call "linkage strength": neighborhoods that are similar to one another in terms of residents' median income, education level, and (to a lesser extent) immigration history are more strongly connected in terms of the of people who spend time there, indicating some level of homophily in the way that individuals choose to move throughout a city's districts.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations27
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicHuman Mobility and Location-Based AnalysisFrench-language works237,207