Using financial statement data as economic indicators for urban governance: the case of Antwerp
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 this paper, the focus is on the interaction between high-quality urban policy-making on the one hand and the issue of data needs to construct useful indicators on the other hand. Such an approach implies that first an evaluation is to be made of the trends and developments that influence the urban development process structurally in order to distinguish some of the important keystones for a justified urban policy. Having a notion of what the urban cornerstones are and how they relate to one another, attention is then paid to the data that are required to monitor the dynamics of these cornerstones. Given that our focus is mainly on monitoring the urban economic dimension, the use of company-related data at district level (i.e. financial statement data obtained by the National Bank of Belgium) seems an interesting starting point. The data are first described and analysed statistically. Next, the methodological framework to construct a number of economic urban indicators is explained and tested. The city of Antwerp is taken as case study.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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