MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7127165723 · doi:10.18357/wg24202222

Using GPS technology to track hitchhiker activity in Northern BC

2022· article· W7127165723 on OpenAlexafffund
Shannon Hyrcha, Roy V. Rea, Rory McClenagan, Scott Emmons, Roger Wheate

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern Geography · 2022
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Deviance, and Social Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsGlobal Positioning SystemEveningDemographicsTrack (disk drive)Assisted GPSNorthern territory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the demographics of hitchhiking can help inform agencies involved in hitchhiking risk and crime prevention to make evidence-based decisions. Using dash-mounted GPS devices designed specifically for this purpose, we partnered with five courier companies to collect temporal and spatial data on hitchhiking activity in northern British Columbia between June 2012 and October 2014. Data collected were: location, time of day, gender, and whether or not the hitchhiker was alone (or in a pair or group). Some citizen science GPS data were also gathered (February to November 2012), along with hitchhiker interview information collected by local highway patrol officers. A total of 775 records revealed that the largest number of hitchhikers in northern British Columbia were First Nations and male between 20 and 49 years of age. Our data suggest that most hitchhikers traveled alone, in the summer, and in the early evening hours. Findings from our study have been mapped and provided to the local Office of the Highway Patrol for risk and crime prevention purposes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWestern GeographySame topicCrime, Deviance, and Social ControlFrench-language works237,207