MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050371790 · doi:10.1111/0735-2166.00067

Jane Jacobs on the Organization of Municipal Government

2000· article· en· W2050371790 on OpenAlex
Andrew Sancton

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

VenueJournal of Urban Affairs · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLocal Government Finance and Decentralization
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaLocal governmentPoliticsInstitutionGovernment (linguistics)Public administrationWork (physics)Unit (ring theory)Center (category theory)SociologyRegional sciencePolitical scienceEconomic growthGeographyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although Jane Jacobs acknowledges the existence of metropolitan areas; her main unit of analysis for local politics is the center-city municipality. She is interested in how it can be decentralized, both to districts and to neighborhoods. Because she is suspicious of large organizations, she is not an advocate of expanding the size of center-city municipalities or of creating elaborate schemes for metropolitan government. Because she believes that city-regions should be more politically autonomous does not mean that she believes that each should have only one municipal government. Jacobs never confuses the municipality as an institution of local government with the city-region as an incubator of economic activity. She never suggests that the economic fate of cities is determined by municipalities, however they might be organized. By keeping the importance of municipal government in perspective, her work helps us resist arguments that central-city municipalities must be enlarged in size so as to enable their respective cities to compete globally.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.565
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.223 · 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