Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urban research has long recognized that neighbourhoods are dynamic and relational. However, lack of data, methodologies, and computer processing power have hampered a formal quantitative examination of neighbourhood relational dynamics. To make progress on this issue, this study proposes a graph neural network (GNN) approach that permits combining and evaluating multiple sources of information about internal characteristics of neighbourhoods, their past characteristics, and flows of groups among them, potentially providing greater expressive power in predictive models. By exploring a public large-scale dataset from Yelp, we show the potential of our approach for considering structural connectedness in predicting neighbourhood attributes, specifically to predict local culture. Results are promising from a substantive and methodologically point of view. Substantively, we find that either local area information (e.g. area demographics) or group profiles (tastes of Yelp reviewers) give the best results in predicting local culture, and they are nearly equivalent in all studied cases. Methodologically, exploring group profiles could be a helpful alternative where finding local information for specific areas is challenging, since they can be extracted automatically from many forms of online data. Thus, our approach could empower researchers and policy-makers to use a range of data sources when other local area information is lacking.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".