Effects of Transit-Oriented Development on Affordable Housing, Job Accessibility, and Affordability of Transportation in the Metro Green Line Corridor of Los
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The premise of this study is that an understanding of catalysts and impacts of social and economic change in the Los Angeles Metro Green Line study corridor and an analysis of current planning policies can help identify how future planning policies may generate more ideal and positive outcomes for the study corridor. This study evaluated the conditions within the transit corridor with four selected station areas defined by a onemile radius from each station. The stations that make up the transit corridor are along the Los Angeles Metro Green Line that runs east west between Redondo Beach and Norwalk. A mile radius buffer was chosen to fully capture the spacing between the stations linearly and use that to define the corridor’s primary area of influence. This study evaluated the changes in demographic composition, housing affordability, transportation affordability and job accessibility within the Metro Green Line corridor between the year 2000 and 2010. Trends in the corridor revealed that over a ten-year span, the corridor saw shifts in demographic composition, growth in job and housing densities and increases in the cost of housing. Over the ten years, the corridor has not yet developed to the standards of a
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".