Residence-employment structure analysis on spaces of geography and flows in Shenyang City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article makes a comprehensive spatial analysis of Shenyang City's residence-employment structure,using factor analysis method and and employment data from the Sixth Population Census and the Second Economic Census.Comparative analysis based on geographical space at urban scale and space of flows via variables reveals some key findings.(1) The four factors of Shenyang's geographical space are mass factor,comprehensive employment factor,grass-root floating population factor,and cultural elite factor,while the city's space of flows can be characterized by factor and employment factor.(2) The function plays a more important role than the employment function in shaping the city's geographical space,although the latter still accounts for noticeable variance across urban geographical space.Thus the analysis of integrated residence-employment space is crucial in understanding the city's spatial and functional structure.(3) The distribution of the elements of urban society is still largely organized within the traditional geographical space.Residential space is more differentiated than employment space,with the employment space demonstrating a higher degree of concentration.(4) Apparent differences can be observed between the residence-employment space of cultural elite and that of the ordinary urban mass.As a result of the development and distribution of universities,Danwei(working unit) is still one of the key spatial characteristics of the expanding mega-city.(5) The city's space is expanding almost ubiquitously,while the expansion of employment space is much limited.For example,the employment of elite class is located in urban heart and along the city's Golden Corridor,resulting in obvious residence-employment spatial mismatch.Several large-scale structures have formed in urban space,such as residential sector,employment corridor,and flow sphere.(6) Universities and university towns,administrative offices,financial institutions,and other producer services are the main constituents of the city's space of flows.In the spatial organization of variables,no clear decentralization or polycentralization in employment has emerged.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".