MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050373523 · doi:10.1177/0042098013498623

Zipf’s Law and Canadian Urban Growth

2013· article· en· W2050373523 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aurélie Lalanne

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional Economics and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZipf's lawEconomic geographyGeographyDistribution (mathematics)Identification (biology)EconometricsRegional scienceEconomicsStatisticsMathematicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to study the hierarchical structure of the Canadian urban system and to determine the growth processes. Zipf’s law is rejected for the whole country for all periods because of a clear size-domination by a few big cities such as Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. It appears that the dynamics of growth follow a deterministic process related to existing urban size, previous growth and spatial structure. Splitting the Canadian urban system into two—east and west—permits the identification of differences that were not observable when studying the country as a whole. While size and previous growth are still important explanatory variables of growth patterns, these two systems may be distinguished one from the other from the point of view of spatial patterns of distribution of growth rates.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0000.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations21
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban StudiesSame topicRegional Economics and Spatial AnalysisFrench-language works237,207