MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380046566 · doi:10.1080/19427867.2023.2222990

A residential location search model based on the reasons for moving out

2023· article· en· W4380046566 on OpenAlexafffund
Muntahith Mehadil Orvin, Mahmudur Rahman Fatmi

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceMixture modelCurse of dimensionalityLocation modelRelocationMachine learningArtificial intelligenceData miningOperations researchEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modeling spatial search processes such as residential location search are challenging, particularly, due to the need to deal with a large dataset and wide array of factors. This introduces a multi-dimensionality challenge to location search modeling. With the motivation to accommodate multi-dimensionality, this paper develops a machine learning–based Gaussian mixture model (GMM) for location search. This study accommodates the effects of several factors including accessibility, land use, dwelling, transportation infrastructure, and neighborhood attributes on location search decisions. The spatial unit of analysis is dwelling-level. This study conceptualizes that households’ search for location based on their reason to move. The pool of alternatives for each household is generated based on probability estimates of GMM. The location choice model considering the reason-based GMM outperforms the model without considering relocation reasons in GMM and random sampling-based model in-terms of predictive performance. The search model has been implemented in an integrated urban model.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation LettersSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207