MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W203653299

LA CROISSANCE URBAINE : DÉTERMINISMES VS BRUIT

2012· article· fr· W203653299 on OpenAlexaff
Gilles Duranton

Bibliographic record

VenueRegion et Developpement · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional Economics and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStylized factEconomic geographyEconometricsSeries (stratigraphy)Rank (graph theory)Order (exchange)GeographyEconomicsRegional scienceMathematicsGeologyMacroeconomicsCombinatorics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper carries out a comparative analysis of two series of urban growth models : the determinist models and the random urban growth models. The first ones consider that innovation and R&D activities explain the coexistence between diversified and specialized cities. The latter play a role of 'nursery cities' by facilitating experimentation for new productive combinations (Duranton and Puga, 2001). Classical urban growth models do not generate the rank-size rule for cities), whereas random growth models are much more adequate in order to explain this stylized fact. This paper also examines the theoretical foundations of both series of models.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.215 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRegion et DeveloppementSame topicRegional Economics and Spatial AnalysisFrench-language works237,207