MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317033283 · doi:10.1155/2023/9662990

Assessing the Impacts of Stay-in-Place Policy of COVID-19 Pandemic during the Chinese Spring Festival: A Stated Preference Approach

2023· article· en· W4317033283 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xiaofeng Pan, Tao Feng, Yanyi Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTRIPS architectureHomecomingMixed logitCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Context (archaeology)PreferencePandemicChinaLatent class modelGeographyDemographic economicsSocioeconomicsLogistic regressionEconomicsTransport engineeringEngineeringMedicineHistoryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to investigate Chinese people’s willingness to stay in the city where they work when the Spring Festival meets the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, a stated choice experiment about intercity travel including three homecoming trips (i.e., trips carried by conventional railway, high-speed railways, and private car) and the option “stay in place” was designed. Respondents were requested to choose the most preferred alternative in the context of the current situation of the COVID-19 pandemic and relevant policies. Based on the data collected from 800 respondents, a latent class mixed logit model was developed and estimated to capture the potential correlations within alternatives and respondents and the preference heterogeneity between respondents. Two latent classes were identified, one of which paid more attention to epidemic prevention policies while the other cared more about the characteristics of homecoming trips. Results show that people’s willingness to stay in the city of work is largely dependent on epidemic prevention policies in their hometowns and decisions of social network members.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207