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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a lack of knowledge about effective implementation of intensification policies. The paper concentrates on the intensification experience of Sydney, Australia, and Toronto, Canada. Historical narratives, which document intensification efforts and outcomes since the 1950s, paint different pictures. For much of the period, Sydney adopted a medium-density strategy sustained by public-sector incentives and regulations. In Toronto, in contrast, the focus has been on high-density developments driven mostly by market trends. Lately, however, the Sydney intensification strategy has shifted to high-density projects. The paper concludes by drawing out findings that are relevant to intensification policies in the selected metropolitan regions and elsewhere: the ubiquity of NIMBY reactions; the importance of senior government involvement because less sensitive to anti-density NIMBY reactions; the possibility of framing intensification strategies in ways that avoid political party confrontation; and the role of major environmental movements in raising public opinion support to intensification.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it