MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410731859 · doi:10.1016/j.tra.2025.104503

Towards completely caring 15-minute neighbourhoods

2025· article· en· W4410731859 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Anastasia Soukhov, Léa Ravensbergen, Lucía Mejía-Dorantes, Antonio Páez

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Part A Policy and Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTransport engineeringBusinessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The “15-Minute City” concept has been embraced by global leaders to promote human-scale neighbourhoods with transport and land-use designs that support short trips to daily necessities. This paper bridges the 15-Minute City to “Mobility of Care”, a framework that foregrounds travel to care destinations, travel done predominately by women. This focus contrasts the more commonly studied travel to employment and leisure destinations. While the 15-Minute City concept is flexible enough to consider all destination types, gendered examinations are relatively lacking in the literature, and little research to date has focused explicitly on care destinations. This gap is addressed in this paper by identifying which areas in the city of Hamilton, Canada are ‘caring 15-minute neighbourhoods’. To do so, a database of care destinations was compiled to estimate the number (using the cumulative opportunity accessibility measure) and diversity of mix (using an entropy measure) of care destinations within a 15-minute walk from residential parcels. Using data-driven machine learning techniques (Self-Organizing Maps and Decision Trees), neighbourhoods were classified into ‘caring 15-minute neighbourhood’ typologies that are examined across residential socio-economic profiles. Our results suggest that the majority of caring 15-minute neighbourhoods are in the urban core, where more lower-income households currently reside. In contrast, areas that lack caring 15-minute neighbourhoods are in higher-income peripheral areas. Areas that make good candidates for urban policy intervention are identified and the implications of enhancing 15-minute walkable caring access are discussed in relation to equtiy and gender mainstreaming in transportation planning and limitations of this work. • What destinations matter? “Mobility of Care” is joined to the 15-Minute City concept. • A case study of access to care destinations in Hamilton, Canada is explored. • 15-minute walking access and diversity of care category access is measured. • “Caring 15-minute neighborhoods” are identified through machine learning approaches. • Residential profiles of these “complete” and “caring” typologies are examined.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Part A Policy and PracticeSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207