MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187543144 · doi:10.3390/ijgi10080517

Smartphone GPS Locations of Students’ Movements to and from Campus

2021· article· en· W3187543144 on OpenAlexaffabout
Patricia K. Doyle–Baker, Andrew Ladle, Angela Rout, Paul Galpern

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUniversity campusGlobal Positioning SystemGeographyPsychologyMedical educationApplied psychologyComputer scienceMedicineLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For many university students, commuting to and from campus constitutes a large proportion of their daily movement, and therefore it may influence their ability and willingness to spend time on campus or to participate in campus activities. To assess student engagement on campus, we collected smartphone GPS location histories from volunteers (n = 280) attending university in a major Canadian city. We investigated how campus visit length and frequency were related to characteristics of the commute using Bayesian regression models. Slower commutes and commutes over longer distances were associated with more time spent but less frequent visits to campus. Our results demonstrate that exposure to campus life, and therefore the potential for student engagement, may relate not just to whether a student lives on or near campus, but also to urban environmental factors that interact to influence the commuting experience.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS International Journal of Geo-InformationSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207