MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2566381876

Large Housing estates: ideas, rise, fall and recovery

2001· article· en· W2566381876 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hugo Priemus, Frank Wassenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueBK BOOKS · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeighbourhood (mathematics)Scale (ratio)Quarter (Canadian coin)SubdivisionPublic housingFunction (biology)Psychological interventionBusinessGeographyEconomic growthEconomicsCartographyArchaeologyPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large housing estates: for some people these three words symbolise all that is wrong in urban planning. Large is wrong, because many people prefer a living surrounding that reflects the human scale. Housing as a single function is wrong, because mixed areas are livelier. And estates are wrong, as these refer to top-down planned areas which the residents themselves have no say in. Although many such estates function well, others have proved to be in serious problems. The question is how to deal with this legacy. For these estates to recover, an integrated solution is needed. Large-scale problems require large-scale interventions. The Amsterdam Bijlmermeer area has been the most deprived and stigmatised area in the Netherlands for at least a quarter of a century, despite its glorious design in the 1960s. The Bijlmermeer can now be considered as a leading case for area regeneration. The author has followed this fascinating neighbourhood for years and provides an analysis of its construction, fall and recovery. Moreover, he compares the Bijlmermeer with many other large housing estates in the Netherlands and abroad, and analyses what conclusions may be of use for other areas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.015
Scholarly communication0.0120.012
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBK BOOKSSame topicHousing, Finance, and NeoliberalismFrench-language works237,207