MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089420366 · doi:10.7202/1016382ar

Permeable Boundaries: Negotiation, Resistance, and Transgression of Street Space in Saint-Henri, Quebec, 1875-1905

2005· article· en· W2089420366 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kathleen Lord

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban History Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic spaceElitePoliticsBourgeoisieGentrificationResistance (ecology)AnnexationSociologyNegotiationLawDemocracyPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In late-nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century Saint-Henri, the street was a contested space. The local elite’s municipal management of public space conflicted with the popular social use of the streets, both in the design and promotion of the main commercial street, rue Notre-Dame, and in the moral regulation of street behaviour. Political negotiation was limited to male property owners, for restrictions on the municipal franchise in a bourgeois liberal democracy excluded most women, many tenants, and all street vagrants. Mounting public debt resulting from the promotional politics of expropriation and bonusing incited popular resistance and, in 1905, led to annexation to the city of Montreal. The local elite directed the use of public space in ways that conformed with their private perspectives. Local by-laws and policing efforts largely succeeded in eliminating or displacing criminal and disruptive behaviour on rue Notre-Dame by day, but nightly disturbances and illicit activities were common on adjoining residential streets, in hidden areas, and in the neighbouring community of Sainte-Cunégonde. A wider range of primary sources, including photographs and sketches, are crucial to disclosing the class and gendered nature of street life.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.696

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0110.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban History ReviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207