MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Urbanism Changes Personality Types, or Is Just a Way of Life? —Contrast in Simmel’s and Wirth’s Metropolis

2014· article· en· W1829697307 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shi Yan-ling

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in sociology of science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational, Social, and Political Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTheme (computing)Contrast (vision)SociologyPersonalityEpistemologyUrbanismPsychoanalysisAestheticsHistoryPhilosophyPsychologyArchitecture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One is regarded by sociologists as one of the founders of the discipline of sociology, the other is the representative figure of the Chicago School, Simmel and Wirth’s works both attracted great attention and interpretations. After more than a century of Simmel’s death and half a century of Wirth’s death, their work still remains a source of puzzlement. This article aims to give a fresh look at their two great works, and come up with a contrast in their theme and analysis. Though both are about metropolis, they differentiate from each other profoundly.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in sociology of scienceSame topicEducational, Social, and Political IssuesFrench-language works237,207