Residential segregation of visible minorities in Canada's gateway cities
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
Although the influx of visible minority immigrants has created an atmosphere of diversity and multicultural‐ism in Canada's three major gateway cities, Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver, immigration has also produced metropolitan landscapes of fragmentation and ethnic separation. The objective of this study is to compare the residential patterns of visible minority populations in Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver, using a rigorous and consistent method that examines the temporal and spatial nature of segregation and its links to local housing characteristics. The paper reviews the literature on models of urban separation, and ethnic and visible minority segregation in Canadian cities, and develops four propositions regarding expected residential patterns and concentrations of visible minorities. It tests these propositions using an analysis of 1986, 1991 and 1996 Census data, in which residential patterns in the three cities are examined and related to the distribution of different types of housing. Our findings confirm previous research results of fragmentation and dispersal, but we uncover decisive differences between cities. Bien que l'afflux d'immigrants appartenant à des minorités visibles ait créé un climat de diversité et de multiculturalisme dans trois des principales portes d'entrée au Canada, à savoir Montréal, Toronto, Vancouver, il n'en reste pas mains que cet afflux a aussi produit des paysages métropolitains de fragmentation et séparation ethniques. L'objectifde cette étude est de comparer les modèles résidentiels des populations minoritaires visibles de Montréal, Toronto et Vancouver; pour ce, nous avons utilisé une méthodologie rigoureuse qui examine la nature de cette ségrégation, du point de vue temporel et spatial ainsi que ses liens avec les caractéristiques des habitats locaux. L'article fait une recension des écrits portant sur les modèles de séparation urbaine, ainsi que sur la ségrégation des minorités ethniques et visibles. II développe quatre propositions concernant les modèles résidentiels et les concentrations de minorités visibles anticipés. L'article vérifie ces propositions à partir de l'analyse des données du recensement des années 1986, 1991 et 1996, dans lesquelles les modèles résidentiels étaient étudiés et mis en rapport avec la distribution des différents types d'habitat. Nos conclusions confirment les résultats de recherches antérieures sur la fragmentation et la dispersion, mais dévoilent en même temps des différences cruciales entre les villes.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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