Analysis of Built Environment Influences on Walking Trips and Distance Walked in a Mid-sized Canadian City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study seeks to advance current methods to measure walkability by relating detailed non-motorized infrastructure data with walking behavior in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. Walking distances were estimated using an innovative approach that involved spatially referencing trip location data from a travel diary and calculating shortest distance along a pedestrian network that incorporates both street and off-street pedestrian path data. Results indicate that when controlling for individual and household socio-demographic characteristics, pedestrians walk approximately the same average daily distance, regardless of their home neighborhood walkability. By explicitly examining both walking trips and distances as outcomes, it was possible to consider trade-offs between number of trips and distance walked, by neighborhood walkability. However, individuals living in more walkable neighborhoods are both more likely to walk at least once and engage in more walking trips than those in less walkable neighborhoods. These findings support the notion that increased accessibility reduces trip distances by bringing origins and destinations closer together. The findings from this study can help to inform design standards as part of neighborhood definitions and distance thresholds to destinations to support walking.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".