MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214818776 · doi:10.5198/jtlu.2021.1854

The evolution of choice set formation in dwelling and location with rising prices: A decadal panel analysis in the Greater Toronto Area

2021· article· en· W3214818776 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jason Hawkins, Khandker Nurul Habib

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transport and Land Use · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMixed logitDiscrete choiceEconometricsChoice setLogitNested logitEstimationSample (material)Set (abstract data type)Quality (philosophy)Real estateLogistic regressionEconomicsComputer scienceStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Home location choice is based on both the characteristics of the dwelling (e.g., size, style, number of bedrooms) and the location (e.g., proximity to work, quality of schools, accessibility). Recent years have seen a steep increase in the price of housing in many major cities. In this research, we examine how these price increases are affecting the types of dwelling and locations considered by households. A large sample of real estate listings from 2006 and 2016 from the Greater Toronto Area is used to develop the empirical models. Two recently developed discrete choice models are used in the study: a nested logit model with latent class feedback (LCF) and a semi-compensatory independent availability logit (SCIAL) model. A method of alternative aggregation is proposed to overcome the computational hurdle that often impedes the estimation of choice set models. We find a significant increase in the probability of larger households considering townhouses and apartments over detached single-family dwellings between 2006 and 2016.

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)0.002
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 score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Transport and Land UseSame topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207