MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413550097 · doi:10.1177/23998083251374724

ActiveCA: Time use data from the general social survey of Canada to study active travel

2025· article· en· W4413550097 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Bruno Dias dos Santos, Mahdis Moghadasi, Antonio Páez

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning B Urban Analytics and City Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes {ActiveCA}, an open data product with Canadian time use data. {ActiveCA} is an R data package that contains analysis-ready data related to active travel spanning almost 40 years, extracted from Cycles 2 (1986), 7 (1992), 12 (1998), 19 (2005), 24 (2010), 29 (2015), and 34 (2022) of the Time Use Survey (TUS) from the General Social Survey (GSS). Active travel episodes are characterized by mode, with walking being part of every cycle and bicycling starting in 1992. The attributes of active trips are the types of locations of origins and destinations, the duration of trips, and episode weights for expanding the trips to population-wide estimates. Based on the year of the survey, a variety of locations are coded. In earlier cycles, these include home, work or school, and other's home, whereas in later cycles these are augmented with locations such as grocery stores, restaurants, outdoor destinations, and others. The geographical resolution includes the province and whether the episode was in an urban or rural setting.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.028
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.008

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning B Urban Analytics and City ScienceSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207