Britain's tall building boom: now bust?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From early 2005 up to the freeze induced by the world's faltering financial markets during the first quarter of 2008, Britain experienced a demand for tall buildings of an unprecedented high level: in London alone, ten tall buildings have started, or were due to start on site, between the first quarter of 2007 to the fourth quarter of 2008. This is directly comparable in size with America's Manhattan Island skyscraper boom of the 1920s. The objectives of this paper are: first, to investigate the evolution of the UK tall building and determine the reasons behind this building form's growth at unprecedented rates; second, to define the UK tall building and compare it with the international tall building stage; third, to analyse the differing types of demand and categorise these subsectors of the UK tall building market; fourth, to calculate the size and value of this specialist construction market in the UK and forecast its growth potential; and finally, to analyse the latest negative market developments during 2008 and warn of the current match of the UK tall building market to the Skyscraper Index model and the resulting risk of full-blown economic recession.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".