Accessibility of Peripheral Regions: Evidence from Aegean Islands (Greece)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Islands, especially smaller ones, are characterized by discontinuity of space and are considered as some of the least accessible areas. In this paper, we seek to shed light on the accessibility problems that islands face from the point of view of island residents. This shift in emphasis considers additional aspects to accessibility that include the availability of connections to access services required to cover the needs of island residents and the different destinations where these may be available, and the time that one may have to spend to get to these destinations in order to use these services. An alternative measure of accessibility is proposed, based on the time required to travel; this is then applied to three different Greek islands in the Aegean Sea. The accessibility of the residents of these islands to selected services is compared with that of settlements in continental Greece of similar population and distance to the capital Athens. The findings clearly demonstrate the adversities that island residents have to face, especially for smaller islands, where accessing selected services may require as many as four destinations, with virtual distances 4 to 6 times longer than ‘real distances’.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it