Framing Event Legacy in a Prospective Host City: Managing Vancouver’s Olympic Bid
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
In preparation for Olympic bids, city officials and event managers often cite event “legacies” and argue that such benefits may be realized for decades. Meanwhile, public support is extremely important when moving forward with a bid; legacy has therefore become a prominent feature in bid committee rhetoric and in the management of event bidding, and how the notion of legacy is managed in the media by bid proponents will be key to a successful bid. This paper explores how legacy was framed in the newspaper media during the Olympic bid in Vancouver, where city officials, local politicians, and members of the bid committee focused their pro-bid arguments around infrastructure, economic, and social legacies. Results show how these legacies entered the bid discourse at various points in the domestic and international bid competitions, as supporters moved away from discussions of new infrastructure development and economic impacts toward intangible event benefits.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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