MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406195345 · doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2024.12.058

Analysing gender equality in Barcelona through (spatiotemporal) segmentation

2025· article· en· W4406195345 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lucía Mejía-Dorantes, Jaume Barceló

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation research procedia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGeneralitat de Catalunya
KeywordsSegmentationComputer scienceGender equalityArtificial intelligenceTransport engineeringComputer visionEngineeringGender studiesSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Activity participation is influenced by many factors, such as the ones related to the built environment, but also to individual attributes. Herein we explore sequences of daily activities and travel employing techniques from the sequencing of events in the life course of individuals. Studying sequences of daily episodes (each activity and each trip) allows us to study the entire trajectory of a person's activity during a day while at the same time considering the number of activities, order of activities in a day, and their durations jointly. We applied this method to a sample of residents in the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona (RMB) in 2018, 2019, and 2020 Travel Surveys. We have focused on fragmentation analysis in activity participation, especially concerning gender, age, activity, and transportation mode. As expected, the survey from 2020 deserves a particular approach since activity patterns vary compared to surveys before the COVID-19 spread outbreak. In this respect, active transport shows to be particularly important that year. Overall, the results show that activity participation cannot be disentangled from gender, individual life-course, and the built environment.

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)0.003
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 score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation research procediaSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207