Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the Susette Kelo et al. v. City of New London, Connecticut, et al. decision of 2005, a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court held that the use of eminent domain by the New London Development Corporation, a nonprofit organization charged with redeveloping a depressed site in New London, Connecticut, was not a violation of the Fifth Amendment, which prevents the taking of private property for "public use" without just compensation. Unlike prior eminent domain decisions, the immediate beneficiaries in Kelo were private interests: the public benefit was simply the localized trickle-down effects of economic redevelopment. This short commentary argues that Kelo offers an instructive window into the contradictory geographies of property under urban neoliberalism. While neoliberal redevelopment frequently invokes and mobilizes private property, it may also dispossess owners and rework entitlements in the name of "highest and best use," as in New London. The social geographies of dispossession, however, are not equitable: smaller and otherwise marginalized interests may suffer disproportionately, despite ideological assurances to the contrary.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.057 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".