MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004292194 · doi:10.3828/tpr.2015.4

‘Spatial anarchy’ versus ‘spatial apartheid’: rural housing ironies in Ireland and England

2015· article· en· W2004292194 on OpenAlexaff
Menelaos Gkartzios, Mark Shucksmith

Bibliographic record

VenueTown Planning Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsAgriculture Food and Rural Development
FundersRural Sociological Society
KeywordsRuralityAusterityRural housingSpatial planningNorth eastNorthern irelandGeographyRural areaEconomic growthPolitical scienceSociologySocioeconomicsEconomicsEnvironmental planningEthnologyLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rural planning and housing have provoked challenging debates in Ireland and England through periods of economic growth and, more recently, crisis and austerity. In this paper, we comparatively review an extensive literature in both countries relating to the formation of their planning systems and cultural predispositions surrounding rural housing development. We highlight that in both cases selective constructions of rurality have shaped policy discourses surrounding rural housing provision that aimed to implement policies prioritising homeownership in Ireland, and environmental conservation in England. Both selective ruralities, however, have produced compromised outcomes, discussed here as ‘spatial anarchy’ and ‘spatial apartheid’ respectively.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations23
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTown Planning ReviewSame topicHousing, Finance, and NeoliberalismFrench-language works237,207