MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402378021 · doi:10.1080/03081060.2024.2399635

Access to green and gray urban nature amenities: exploring equity in Montreal's built environment

2024· article· en· W4402378021 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Planning and Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalMcGill University
FundersMitacs
KeywordsTransport engineeringEquity (law)Built environmentRegional scienceGeographyEngineeringBusinessEnvironmental planningPolitical scienceCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contemporary ideologies have identified two main paradigms contributing to sustainable cities: green urban and gray urban nature. The first refers to features that make cities greener, such as parks or tree coverage. The second refers to gray but sustainable areas, such as dense areas or the proximity to key amenities that can foster active travel. Accessibility to green and gray urban nature amenities by active transport is essential for evaluating if cities are sustainable. We analyzed the accessibility to green (green spaces) and gray (food stores and pharmacies) urban nature in Montreal. The findings show that most people have sufficient access to green and gray urban nature, and low-income groups have better access than high-income groups. Areas with access to both tend to be highly dense, suggesting that dense areas have sustainable attributes. Transport planning interventions in areas lacking access are necessary to achieve sustainable goals in Montreal.

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.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.597

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.268 · 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