Central places or networks? Paradigms, metaphors, and spatial configurations of innovation-related service use
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been suggested that a paradigm shift has occurred in the study of urban systems, central places being displaced by networks because the latter are better suited to currently observable processes. Cities are understood as harbouring local networks (milieu, clusters, buzz), as well as being themselves functionally specialised nodes in wider nonhierarchical networks. We test the empirical validity of this contention by analysing the geography of service use by innovators in Canada. Consistent with the results of Christaller, we find that use of local services diminishes as one moves down the urban hierarchy, and services most strongly connected with innovation—which we deem to be high-order—have the highest probability of being sourced at its summit. Our conclusions interrogate some of the assumptions that underpin local innovation networks, question whether the network approach can apprehend all aspects of urban systems, and discuss in what respect contention that there has been a paradigm shift is warranted.
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.
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 it