MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415209199 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-12198-x

A geography of indoors for analyzing global ways of living using computer vision

2025· article· en· W4415209199 on OpenAlexaff
Martina Mazzarello, Mikita Klimenka, Rohit Priyadarshi Sanatani, Javad Eshtiyagh, Yanhua Yao, Paolo Santi, Fábio Duarte, Richard Florida, Carlo Ratti

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobalizationClass (philosophy)Diversity (politics)Cultural diversityStatistical analysisVisual methods

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globalization is claimed to have a homogenizing effect, reducing pronounced local cultural differences. Indoor living spaces are among the most vivid expressions of local culture, yet they remain underexplored in this context. Our visual AI framework, utilizing a unique dataset of over 400,000 Airbnb images, investigates the diversity in living spaces across 80 cities. By employing deep learning classification models, Gradient-Weighted Class Activation Mapping techniques, and statistical analysis, we demonstrate that both geographic proximity and the extent of globalization significantly correlate with the visual characteristics of indoor spaces (R = 0.23-0.30 and R ≈ 0.47, respectively). Our results indicate that despite global pressures and trends towards cultural homogenization, local identities and cultural distinctions nevertheless remain.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 venueScientific Reports→Same topicLand Use and Ecosystem Services→French-language works237,207→