Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper reports a case study of factors attracting and retaining talented and creative workers in Halifax, Nova Scotia. All categories of workers interviewed mentioned quality of place and amenities in discussing their location preferences, but that could not fully explain their choices. For some occupations (like health research), talented people followed jobs; in other sectors (like music), talented workers migrated to a sympathetic locale with the right conditions for creative engagement; creative workers in some occupations (like those in architectural, engineering or planning consulting) were more rooted in place. The social dynamics—that is, positive and collaborative social networks within key sectors and a wider community perceived as welcoming and interesting—make this mid‐sized city attractive to talented workers. Local universities and a vibrant music scene generate a mutually reinforcing context that attracted mobile talented and creative workers to the city. Respondents noted Halifax's limited cultural diversity but did not report a perceived lack of tolerance as affecting their choices. In smaller cities, the social dynamics of place and workplace and the quality of life available may play more significant roles than tolerance in attracting and retaining talented workers, challenging a basic assumption of creative cities discourse .
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".