Bibliographic record
Abstract
The theme of social exclusion is of pressing urgency to contemporary societies as the dynamics of the global market determine rapid and constant variations in local economic, demographic and, consequently, social factors: in a global system governed by the exclusive logic of profit, objectives of competitiveness and productivity appear to have substantially supplanted the growth and welfare of populations.These processes directly involve urban transformation: the configuration of the city, its spaces and its facilities appear to be increasingly less inspired by values of justice and social equity; it follows that possible categories of users, in relation to gender, age, social status and ethnic background, may face discrimination in relation to the free and full use of the city's buildings and spaces.By delineating limits and borders -whether material or symbolic -the city constitutes a powerful vehicle of social exclusion.The configuration of the spaces and objects of the city, once the expression of local culture and identity and the fulfilment of historically referenced poetics, languages and technologies, is no neutral act when it involves the full participation of the city's inhabitants.Other than pursuing aesthetic and functional objectives it also determines the quality of the relationships that develop between urban space and its users, operating in terms of selectivity.The essay attempts to reflect on the devices at work in the contemporary city as a tool of social exclusion.The assumption of the concept of public space as a common good presents itself as an unavoidable passage towards the construction of an urban reality home for the harmonious existence between all of its components, of an inclusive city, a city for everyone.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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".