MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Workplace Restructuring and Urban Form: The Changing National Settlement Patterns of the Canadian Workforce

2010· article· en· W2021821127 on OpenAlexaffabout
Markus Moos, Andrejs Skaburskis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Urban Affairs · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRestructuringWorkforceSettlement (finance)SalarySustainabilityCensusConsumption (sociology)Economic growthWageBusinessLabour economicsDemographic economicsEconomic geographyGeographyEconomicsSociologyMarket economyPopulationFinancePayment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

:This article examines the relationship between emerging work arrangements and national settlement patterns. While growth is centralized in large cities, social commentators continue to suggest that workplace restructuring—facilitated by technological progress—encourages more dispersed settlement patterns, evoking concern about the environmental sustainability of the trend. Multivariate analysis using Canadian census data shows that with the exception of self-employed professionals, the home workers, and self-employed in nonmanual occupations have a lower tendency to reside in large cities than otherwise similar wage and salary earning commuters. However, household mobility and temporal trends suggest that workplace restructuring is not dispersing workers away from large cities by inducing mobility, but that take-up is higher in more remote areas. It is argued that workplace restructuring permits more dispersed national settlement patterns than if workers needed to move to large cities for proximity to employment growth. The article reflects on the implications of the findings for urban sustainability policies that promote compact urban forms and the policies that emphasize consumption amenities of cities to attract mobile workers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations26
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Urban AffairsSame topicUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation StudiesFrench-language works237,207