MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386738218 · doi:10.1111/cag.12879

Associations between socio‐demographic factors and change in mobility due to COVID‐19 restrictions in Ontario, Canada using geographically weighted regression

2023· article· en· W4386738218 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ben Klar, Jason Gilliland, Jed Long

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyCensusPandemicDemographicsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Geographic mobilityGeographically Weighted RegressionMultilevel modelRegression analysisDemographyDemographic economicsPopulationComputer scienceStatisticsSociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Transportation research has shown that socio‐demographic factors impact people's mobility patterns. During the COVID‐19 pandemic, some of these effects have changed in accordance with changing mobility needs adapting to the pandemic, including restrictions on in‐person gatherings, closure of in‐person businesses, and working from home. We investigate two gaps in current knowledge in this area of transportation research: to what extent the associations between socio‐demographic factors and mobility metrics have changed, and how these associations vary across geographic space. We used aggregate deidentified cell tower location data to measure two mobility metrics—movement time and radius of gyration—and socio‐demographic data from the 2016 Canadian Census to model these associations across Ontario, Canada in 2020 using a linear model and a geographically weighted regression model. We find that certain associations between socio‐demographics and mobility have changed from what we previously observed before the pandemic, and we can see the variation of these associations across space. These findings will improve our understanding of how socio‐demographic factors affect mobility patterns in different communities and demonstrate the importance of measuring these associations at a more fine‐grained level using models that consider spatial variation to best reflect the nature of these associations.

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)0.005
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennesSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207