Mapping the lines : an exploration of mobility and urban spaces amongst bicycle couriers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent perspectives in social theory have highlighted the need for space to be understood as active in the patterning of social life. In this thesis, I consider how space in related to the patterning of corporeal mobility in cities by drawing upon interviews conducted with bicycle couriers. I show how space and mobility are articulated towards one another through the anticipatory interface of the cognitive map. The interviews also suggest that in addition to anticipation, mobility is also largely creative and circumstantial. The popular interpretation of such creativity as resistance to a spatial structure is specifically rejected in favor of interpreting this creativity as improvisation. This interpretation stems from the theoretical understanding of urban spaces as not closed systems but diagrammatic assemblages that are open to a degree of play at the margins. From this perspective, I conclude that improvisation is not the deconstruction of spatial meaning but the means by which the normative dimension of spaces become established.Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2004 .B69. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 43-03, page: 0745. Adviser: Daniel O'Connor. Thesis (M.A.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2004.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".