MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109913618 · doi:10.2747/0272-3638.23.8.703

Immigration, Polarization, or Gentrification? Accounting for Changing House Prices and Dwelling Values in Gateway Cities

2002· article· en· W2109913618 on OpenAlexaffabout
David Ley, Judith Tutchener, Greg Cunningham

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Geography · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGentrificationMetropolitan areaCensusPolarization (electrochemistry)ImmigrationHouse priceGeographyGlobal cityEconomic geographyDemographic economicsCensus tractUnivariateGateway (web page)Multivariate statisticsEconomicsEconomic growthSociologyDemographyEconometricsPopulationStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Past research has identified immigration, social polarization, and gentrification as factors with significant impacts upon price movements and other housing characteristics in gateway cities. This study attempts to compare the effects of these three factors in Toronto and Vancouver, Canada's primary gateway cities, over the period from 1971 to 1996. The paper describes house price changes from Multiple Listing Service rolls and changes of dwelling values in census tracts, and interprets visual evidence for the effects of the three factors. The observed centralization of price gains is then sharpened in a univariate and multivariate analysis of changes in dwelling values for census tracts in each metropolitan area. While there is consistency in the spatial patterns of changes in housing prices and dwelling values between the two cities, there are differences in the importance of the three processes at different times and places. Moreover, strong effects at the metropolitan scale become much more blurred with spatial disaggregation.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 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

Citations40
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban GeographySame topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207