MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3211523958 · doi:10.1145/3486633.3491094

Mobility Response to COVID-19-related Restrictions in New York City

2021· article· en· W3211523958 on OpenAlexafffund
Emily M. Chen, Grant McKenzie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DistancingDiversity (politics)Work (physics)PopulationGeographic mobilitySocial distanceGeographyEconomic growthDemographic economicsPolitical scienceSociologyDemographyMedicineEconomicsEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first case of the 2019 novel coronavirus was detected in the United States in January 2020, and since then, efforts to contain the virus, such as stay-at-home policies, have greatly restricted human mobility. While stay-at-home policies and concern over the virus contributed to an increase in time spent at home, little is known as to how a change in home dwell time varied by population. The work presented in this paper seeks to understand the relationships between levels of mobility and socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of communities within New York City from February to April 2020. By analyzing the factors that contributed to changes in home dwell time, this work aims to support policymakers and inform future strategies for infection mitigation. Findings from this research reinforce the need for physical distancing policies that acknowledge the existence of socioeconomic and demographic diversity between not only geographic regions in the U.S. but also within a single city.

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 score0.444
Threshold uncertainty score0.883

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.404
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.061 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies→French-language works237,207→