“<scp>G</scp>enerationed” space: Societal restructuring and young adults' changing residential location patterns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Considering Vancouver and Montreal as case studies, this article demonstrates the increasing centralization of the young adult population since the early 1980s. Gentrification, which brings higher income earners to the inner city, is often explained as a class‐based process associated with post‐industrial, post‐Fordist, and, more recently, neo‐liberal restructuring. However, delays in child‐bearing, increasing educational attainment, and the growing amenity and housing component in inner cities have also sharpened the division of space by demographic variables such as age and household size—variables that relate to life‐cycle stage, consumption practices, and generational differences. This article contributes to the understanding of the factors delineating urban space by considering residential location patterns of two different generations of young adults in two metropolitan areas. The findings show that today's young adult residential ecology is increasingly defined by proximity to transit, high‐density housing, and walkability to urban amenities. Due to the higher‐priced housing market and land use planning policies emphasizing densification, the residential pattern is one of concentrated decentralization in Vancouver. In Montreal, centralization of young adults is mostly associated with changing household profiles. In both metropolitan areas, the inner city residential ecology is increasingly delineated by young adults.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".