Urban Agglomeration as an Element of Regional Policy (Canada example)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transition from the alignment of regional development policy levels to the polarized politics of development leads to the task of forming a new system of strategic objectives of territorial development and mechanisms to achieve them. This agglomeration acting as «locomotives» of economic and social development for the surrounding areas can become centers for the modernization and development of the entire national economy. The article considers the role of urban centers in the formation of a federal state regional policy on the example of Canada. The paper analyzes the causes and consequences of the emergence of urban agglomerations, administrative and political structure of emerged subjects, considers entities organized on the basis of public / municipal-private partnerships, focusing on the implementation of cluster initiatives in the territory of agglomerations. On the example of metropolitan areas of Toronto and Montreal, features of formation of a control system and the development of urban centers in Canada are highlighted. The work reveals the positive and negative sides of the agglomeration municipalities, a comparative analysis of the characteristics of agglomerate in Russia and Canada is presented, approaches are proposed. The presented Canadian experience shows that in formation of urban agglomeration it is necessary to seek a compromise between integration and individualization.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".