MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984159309 · doi:10.7202/1016046ar

“Said tree is a veritable nuisance”: Ottawa’s Street Trees 1869-1939

2005· article· en· W1984159309 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban History Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLandscape and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominionNuisanceNatural (archaeology)LawSociologyHistoryPolitical scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Street trees exist in an ambiguous space between built and natural environments, their status reflecting shifting attitudes towards the natural world. Their place was especially evident in debates over street trees in Ottawa between 1869 and 1939. In the late nineteenth century, homeowners were encouraged to plant trees, to bring esthetic order to the residential streetscape and to reduce miasma. But as they matured, the trees came into conflict with the rapidly expanding infrastructure of sidewalks, asphalt paving, and utility wires. The Ottawa Horticultural Society, led by Dominion Horticulturalist W. T. Macoun, urged city council to have them managed professionally. In response, during the 1920s and 1930s the city engaged in an extensive program of tree trimming and removal, targeting the American elm.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0260.002

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.173 · 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