MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004520282 · doi:10.1177/1078087405281107

Governing the Design Economy in MontrÉal, Canada

2006· article· en· W2004520282 on OpenAlex
Deborah Leslie, Norma M. Rantisi

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Affairs Review · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationVisibilityPublic sectorSet (abstract data type)Public policyPolitical economySociologyPolitical scienceEconomicsEconomic systemEconomyEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cultural industries have assumed an increased importance to urban economic development. However, little attention has been paid to accommodating the complex set of activities—both cultural and economic—implicated in cultural production. A recognition of this complexity, however, has significant implications for policy. This paper considers the design sector in Montréal, a sector which has attained international visibility in recent years. We analyze the role played by four public and nonprofit institutions in regulating this sector and illuminate their mechanisms for reconciling commercial and aesthetic imperatives. An examination of such initiatives lends insight into the opportunities and the challenges within policy circles for accommodating a conceptualization of cultural industries that recognizes their irreducibly hybrid nature.

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.320
Threshold uncertainty score0.732

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.206 · 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