MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970826468 · doi:10.1177/1078087403253557

Regional Planning Policy and the Location of Employment in the Ile-De-France

2003· article· en· W1970826468 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Affairs Review · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional Economics and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuburbanizationMetropolitan areaUrban sprawlContext (archaeology)Software deploymentRegional scienceRegional policyVariety (cybernetics)Regionalism (politics)Political scienceEconomic geographyEconomic growthEconomicsGeographyUrban planningPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ongoing debate in North America concerns the effectiveness and efficiency of planning policy at the metropolitan level. Current quantitative research on the deployment of employment across metropolitan areas tends to assume that it is governed by market forces (as expressed through a variety of location factors). However,there are also calls for a form of metropolitan regionalism, for a consistent metropolitan policy framework to guide development and avoid sprawl. In the context of these methodological,interpretative,and policy debates,the authors examine whether the deployment of jobs across the Paris region,which has had a clear and consistent regional planning framework over the past 30 years,has been influenced by this policy. They conclude that over the 1978 to 1994 period,the suburbanization of jobs has been effectively channeled by the policy framework put in place in 1965. Hence, policy matters.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.212 · 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