MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Advancing Smart Cities Through Novel Social Media Text Analysis: A Case Study of Calgary

2023· article· en· W4390483843 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mitra Mirshafee, Ann Barcomb, Benjamin Tan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaData scienceComputer scienceVariety (cybernetics)Smart citySet (abstract data type)Urban planningBureaucracySentiment analysisPopulationPerceptionArtificial intelligenceWorld Wide WebPolitical scienceSociologyPoliticsEngineeringPsychologyInternet of Things

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In numerous cities, population expansion and technological advancements necessitate proactive modernization and integration of technology. However, the existing bureaucratic structure often hinders local officials' efforts to effectively address and monitor residents' needs and enhance the city accordingly. Understanding what people find important and useful can be inferred from their posts on social media. Twitter, as one of the most popular social media platforms, provides us with valuable data that, with the right tools and analysis, can provide insights into the performance of urban services and residents' perception of them. In this study, we used the city of Calgary as an exemplar to gather tweets and analyze topics relating to city development, urban planning, and minorities. Natural language processing (NLP) techniques were used and developed to preprocess stored tweets, classify the emotions, and identify the topics present in the dataset to eventually provide a set of topics with the prevalent emotion in that topic. We utilized a variety of methods to analyze the collected data. BERTopic for topic modeling and few-shot learning using Setfit for emotion analysis outperformed the others. Hence, we identify issues related to city development, senior citizens, taxes, and unemployment using these methods, and we demonstrate how delving into these analyses can improve urban planning.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.593
Threshold uncertainty score0.950

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Mobility and Location-Based AnalysisFrench-language works237,207