MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100196915

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

2007· article· en· W7100196915 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative and Sustainable Housing Initiatives
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensusMetropolitan areaTransit (satellite)Quarter (Canadian coin)RevenueSocioeconomic statusReal estateAgency (philosophy)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

14. Sponsoring Agency Code 15. Supplementary Notes Supported by general revenues from the State of Texas This study is designed to measure the potential impacts that transportation facilities have on adjacent properties compared to non-adjacent properties within a quarter mile. Previously done in 1997, this study is updated with information from 2000 and 2004. Census data were obtained to measure demographic changes from 1980 to 1990 and county appraiser’s office data and were used to examine the relationship between socioeconomic variables and the transit facility. Previously, the 1997 study looked at four transit centers and one park and ride facility in Houston’s Metropolitan Transit Authority (METRO). The current study adds three transit centers from the Central Ohio Transportation Authority (COTA). Because the transit centers were products of transit oriented development, facilities in Columbus differ in appearance and purpose from Houston’s facilities. Findings in this study indicate that transit facilities can affect land value.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.302 · 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