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 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

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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.943

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.064
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