ALF-Score++, a novel approach to transfer knowledge and predict network-based walkability scores across cities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Walkability is an important measure with strong ties to our health. However, there are existing gaps in the literature. Our previous work proposed new approaches to address existing limitations. This paper explores new ways of applying transferability using transfer-learning. Road networks, POIs, and road-related characteristics grow/change over time. Moreover, calculating walkability for all locations in all cities is very time-consuming. Transferability enables reuse of already-learned knowledge for continued learning, reduce training time, resource consumption, training labels and improve prediction accuracy. We propose ALF-Score++, that reuses trained models to generate transferable models capable of predicting walkability score for cities not seen in the process. We trained transfer-learned models for St. John’s NL and Montréal QC and used them to predict walkability scores for Kingston ON and Vancouver BC. MAE error of 13.87 units (ranging 0–100) was achieved for transfer-learning using MLP and 4.56 units for direct-training (random forest) on personalized clusters.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".