MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4205640121 · doi:10.7202/1084231ar

Exposition des cyclistes au bruit en fonction du type de voie cyclable empruntée à Montréal, Laval et Longueuil

2019· article· fr· W4205640121 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Vincent Jarry, Philippe Apparicio

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers de géographie du Québec · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExposition (narrative)ArtPhysicsHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lors de leurs déplacements, les cyclistes utilitaires s’exposent à des niveaux de bruit ayant potentiellement des répercussions sur leur santé. Notre objectif, dans cet article, est d’analyser la variation de l’exposition des cyclistes au bruit à Montréal, Laval et Longueuil en fonction des types de voies cyclables. À partir de données primaires collectées en juin 2018, nous avons construit un modèle de régression généralisé additif mixte avec terme autorégressif pour prédire l’intensité sonore à laquelle s’exposent les cyclistes. Durant la collecte des données, la moyenne de bruit enregistrée a été de 69,3 dB(A). Les résultats montrent que l’exposition au bruit est plus forte lorsque les voies cyclables sont aménagées sur une artère que sur une rue locale. Toutes choses étant égales par ailleurs, des écarts de 4 dB(A) sont mesurés entre les endroits les moins et les plus bruyants. De tels résultats pourraient guider les planificateurs lors de l’aménagement des voies cyclables.

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 score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers de géographie du Québec→Same topicUrban Transport and Accessibility→French-language works237,207→