Satisfaction with Selected Indicators of the Quality of Urban Space by Polonia in the Greater Toronto Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this article is to determine the quality of life of Polonia living in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), with particular emphasis on urban quality, which influences their assessment of the standard of living in this city. The presented results of the research are based on a survey questionnaire conducted with the participation of 583 respondents. The respondents evaluated, among others: accessibility to recreational tourism in the city, public transport, possibilities of finding a job, accessibility to housing and quality of the natural environment. Assessment of the selected indicators was correlated with the application of the statistical coefficient of the chi-squared test with particular sociodemographic characteristics of the examined respondents (with age, place of residence of the respondents (Toronto, suburbs) and their duration of residence in the GTA). On the basis of the formulated research hypotheses and conducted studies, it can be concluded—among others—that the satisfaction level with regard to accessibility to housing increases with age, that people living in the GTA suburbs rate accessibility to transportation lower than people living in Toronto and that people living in the GTA for more than 20 years rate accessibility to tourism, leisure and relaxation lower than people living in the GTA for a period shorter than 20 years.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".