MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122292215 · doi:10.1068/a3610

Gentrification, Segregation, and Discrimination in the American Urban System

2004· article· en· W2122292215 on OpenAlexaff
Elvin Wyly, Daniel J. Hammel

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning A Economy and Space · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGentrificationBoomEthnic groupEconomic geographyCapital (architecture)Investment (military)GeographyRacismDemographic economicsEconomicsPolitical scienceEconomic growthSociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent discussions of the ‘geography of gentrification’ highlight the need for comparative analysis of the nature and consequences of inner-city transformation. In this paper, the authors map the effects of housing-market and policy changes in the 1990s, focusing on 23 large cities in the USA. Using evidence from field surveys and a mortgage-lending database, they measure the class selectivity of gentrification and its relation to processes of racial and ethnic discrimination. They find a strong resurgence of capital investment in the urban core, along with magnified class segregation. The boom of the 1990s and policies targeted towards ‘new markets' narrowed certain types of racial and ethnic disparities in urban credit markets, but there is evidence of intensified discrimination and exclusion in gentrified neighborhoods.

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)0.001
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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Citations212
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning A Economy and SpaceSame topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207