Validity of Walk Score® as a measure of neighborhood walkability in Japan
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective measures of environmental attributes have been used to understand how neighborhood environments relate to physical activity. However, this method relies on detailed spatial data, which are often not easily available. Walk Score® is a free, publicly available web-based tool that shows how walkable a given location is based on objectively-derived proximity to several types of local destinations and street connectivity. To date, several studies have tested the concurrent validity of Walk Score as a measure of neighborhood walkability in the USA and Canada. However, it is unknown whether Walk Score is a valid measure in other regions. The current study examined how Walk Score is correlated with objectively-derived attributes of neighborhood walkability, for residential addresses in Japan. Walk Scores were obtained for 1072 residential addresses in urban and rural areas in Japan. Five environmental attributes (residential density, intersection density, number of local destinations, sidewalk availability, and access to public transportation) were calculated using geographic information systems for each address. Pearson's correlation coefficients between Walk Score and these environmental attributes were calculated (conducted in May 2017). Significant positive correlations were observed between Walk Score and environmental attributes relevant to walking. Walk Score was most closely associated with intersection density (r = 0.82) and with the number of local destinations (r = 0.77). Walk Score appears to be a valid measure of neighborhood walkability in Japan. Walk Score will allow urban designers and public health practitioners to identify walkability of local areas without relying on detailed geographic data
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it