A synthetic vulnerable population dataset for fine scale geographical equity analysis and urban planning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assessing the social and economic vulnerability of populations within a given area is essential for conducting environmental equity evaluations and devising effective public policies to mitigate disparities. However, prevailing indicators used to measure socio-economic vulnerability exhibit several shortcomings. Primarily relying on factor analysis, these indicators face challenges in terms of comparability over time, lack of standardized scales, and inherent limitations associated with composite indicators. To address these shortcomings, we propose a novel approach that estimates the number of potentially vulnerable individuals by constructing a synthetic population. Our methodology, developed using open tools and datasets, offers a scalable solution applicable to the entire Canadian context. The resulting percentage of potentially vulnerable populations demonstrates strong correlations with traditional vulnerability indicators commonly used in Canada, while overcoming their inherent limitations. The generated dataset holds significant potential and serves as a valuable resource for both researchers and governmental organizations. It provides a robust foundation for conducting equity analyses, assessments, and policy evaluations, thereby facilitating evidence-based decision-making processes aimed at promoting social and economic inclusivity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".