MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402547053 · doi:10.1177/00420980241270987

Assessing downtown recovery rates and determinants in North American cities after the COVID-19 pandemic

2024· article· en· W4402547053 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amir Forouhar, Karen Chapple, Jeff Allen, Byeonghwa Jeong, Julia Greenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DowntownPandemic2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)GeographyVirologyMedicineOutbreakInfectious disease (medical specialty)ArchaeologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

North American downtowns are struggling to recover from the global COVID-19 pandemic. This study aims to investigate the varying rates of recovery experienced by downtown areas in the 66 largest cities of the United States and Canada. Leveraging Location-Based Services data extracted from mobile phone location trajectories, we assess the recovery rates in the 2023 post-pandemic period, juxtaposed against pre-pandemic 2019 levels. We find significant disparities in downtown recovery rates. Economic factors emerge as crucial determinants, where downtowns hosting a concentration of sectors with remote/hybrid work options – such as information, finance, professional services and management – displayed sluggish recovery. Conversely, downtowns with a focus on industries like accommodation, manufacturing, education, retail, construction, entertainment and healthcare exhibited greater resilience post pandemic. Furthermore, higher density, crime rates and education levels were correlated with slower recovery rates, as were harsher weather conditions and longer commuting times. Lower-density and auto-orientated downtowns demonstrated a swift rebound, even surpassing pre-pandemic activity levels. These findings underscore the necessity for tailored policies to bolster the revival of North American downtown areas.

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)0.001
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 score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.687

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban StudiesSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207