MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164288198 · doi:10.1017/s0008423906060252

Two Tales of Municipal Reorganization: Toronto's and Montreal's Diverging Paths Toward Regional Governance and Social Sustainability

2006· article· fr· W2164288198 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marie-France Le Blanc

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaPolitical scienceLocal governancePoliticsWelfare economicsLocal governmentGeographyPublic administrationEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract.In Toronto and Montreal, territorial reorganizations modified the arrangements governing regional cooperation, the channels for citizen participation, and the composition of the civic community, all important factors that define the margins local authorities have to control and shape economic and social development. In both cases, these changes brought about a realignment of local civic forces and modified political arrangements at the metropolitan level, leading each city to break from its former path of development. Résumé.Les réorganisations territoriales de Toronto et Montréal ont modifié les paramètres guidant la coopération régionale, les modes de participation des citoyens et la composition de la communauté civique, soit autant de facteurs déterminant les marges de manœuvre des autorités locales pour encadrer le développement économique et social. Dans les deux cas, ces changements ont modifié les institutions politiques métropolitaines et ont amené les deux villes à s'engager dans de nouvelles avenues.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0090.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.284
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Political ScienceSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207