Artists in rural locales: market access, landscape appeal and economic exigency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The period 1971 to 1991 saw a significant increase in the proportion of Canadians employed in the ‘arts’. While still concentrated to a large extent in urban Canada, artists do seek out rural locations to pursue their craft. This paper identifies, interprets and classifies communities in rural Canada that specialize in the production of visual, performing and literary art. Location quotients are calculated from a custom‐tabulated run of 1991 census data on employment in the arts in all Canadian census subdivisions. We propose several factors that may account for high concentrations of artists in some rural places. Cluster analysis is used to develop a classification of Canadian rural arts communities. We identify 371 small arts centres in Canada, ranging from Cape Dorset in the Northwest Territories to Elora in southwestern Ontario. Market access, landscape appeal and economic exigency are among the location determinants isolated. Further analysis reveals that five types of arts communities exist in rural Canada. Future research on a localized scale is now necessary to uncover specific factors responsible for the prevalence of artists in the rural ecumene.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".