MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143055265 · doi:10.1093/jeg/4.2.107

The rise (and decline) of American regional science: lessons for the new economic geography?

2004· article· en· W2143055265 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Economic Geography · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional Economics and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaLondon School of Economics and Political Science
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Regional geographyEconomic scienceHistory of scienceWork (physics)Economic geographySociologyHistorical geographyHuman geographyRegional scienceSocial scienceGeographyEpistemologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Regional science weaves in and out of the story of post-war economic geography. The vision of one man, the American economist Walter Isard, regional science represented the first systematic attempt to further joint work between geographers and economists. Within this context, the tasks of the paper are twofold. The first is to provide an interpretative history of the rise of regional science, and to a much lesser extent its decline. The interpretative framework derives from science studies, and in particular the work of Bruno Latour. The history is based on archival material and interviews. The second is to speculate briefly on the implications of both the interpretive framework used in the paper, and the history of regional science told, for the new economic geography that similarly attempts to convene discussions between economists and geographers.

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 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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.319
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.231 · 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