Residential back taxes and revitalization: a study of Winnipeg's Spence neighbourhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The City of Winnipeg considers the Spence neighbourhood a Major Rehabilitation Area.Socio-economic conditions have deteriorated and the number of boarded-up and abandoned homes has increased.Community groups are calling for revitalization as the conditions escalate toward irreversible decay.Unfortunately, there are numerous barriers to urban revitalization; one obstacle for the redevelopment of homes in this area is the City of Winnipeg's stringent tax policy.Many of the abandoned units have back taxes owing and are left vacant for up to five years before the city claims title to the property.If a private homeowner is in tax arrears and wants to give or sell the home for a nominal amount to a non-profit group, the city stresses that back taxes still have to be paid.Once the five-year tax sale process is completed, homes are easy to acquire from the city.The purpose of this investigation is to illustrate how detrimental a five-year waiting period can be for the already neglected housing stock and the perception of the neighbourhood, as well as its role in accelerating urban decay.iii 9.3 Increasing the Province's Role ......................
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".