MC: The role of spatial representation in the development of a LUR model for
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A land use regression (LUR) model for the mapping of NO2 concentrations in Ottawa, Canada was created based on data from 29 passive air quality samplers from the City of Ottawa’s National Capital Air Quality Mapping Project and two permanent stations. Model sensitivity was assessed against three spatial representations of population: population at the dissemination area level, population at the dissemination block level and a dasy-metrically derived population representation. A spatial data-base with land use, roads, population, zoning, greenspaces and elevation was created. Polycategorical zoning data were used in dasymetric mapping to spatially focus population data derived from the dissemination blocks to a sub-block level for comparison purposes. Dasymetric population map-ping provided no significant LUR model improvement in explained variance when compared to block level popula-tion; however, both the former were significantly better than the dissemination area level population representations. However, where block level population is not available or too costly to acquire, our method using polycategorical zoning data provides a viable alternative in LUR modelling endeavours.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".