MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097023452 · doi:10.1080/00420980601176055

Smart Growth and Development Reality: The Difficult Co-ordination of Land Use and Transport Objectives

2007· article· en· W2097023452 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pierre Filion, Kathleen McSpurren

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Studies · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaSmart growthPublic transportNeighbourhood (mathematics)Economic geographyLand useBusinessIntervention (counseling)Economic growthRegional scienceTransport engineeringEconomicsGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A supportive distribution of residential density is perceived to be an essential component of strategies aimed at increasing the use of public transit. To alter substantially land use-transport dynamics in a fashion that favours public transit patronage, residential density policies must be deployed over long periods and unfold at local and metropolitan levels simultaneously. The article narrates policies that attempted, since the late 1950s, a juxtaposition of high residential density and quality public transit services in the Toronto metropolitan region. Findings highlight the difficulties of pursuing such policies due to the power of neighbourhood-based interests, disagreement among jurisdictions within the metropolitan region and changes in priorities and intervention capacity. The article ends with proposals that seek to enhance the possibility of transforming the structure and dynamics of cities in ways that are compatible with smart growth principles.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.862

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations104
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban StudiesSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207