Bibliographic record
Abstract
The globalisation paradigm has emerged within contemporary social thought as the preferred framework of many urban theorists. This essay discusses the relative usefulness of understanding Belfast as a ‘global’ city and argues that the dominance of ‘Troubles talk’ and discourses of ‘neutral’ space and post-Good Friday Agreement stability have often been explored at the expense of such an understanding. Focusing on a few select examples, most notably the ambitious ‘Titanic Quarter’ development in the city’s docklands, the essay attempts to reposition Belfast within a wider global context by examining how a globalised economy, culture and polity are manifest in the city. In doing so however, it is acknowledged that a wholly global theory cannot hope to fully consider the complex nature of urban life. By drawing attention to those investigating the local and every-day, the essay concludes that a single theoretical lens can offer only a partial understanding. Future research regarding Belfast, it is suggested, should also remain mindful of the seemingly mundane ‘practices’ of the city and the subjective experience of individuals, in order to offer the most comprehensive and nuanced understanding possible.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".