An exploration of the urban form preferences of Edmonton’s creative workers
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
Using data collected from the 2011 census and survey results, this study explores the urban form preferences of Edmonton’s creative workers. Edmonton continues to have a diverse economy, which includes a robust industrial sector. Research on creative class theory has not considered certain social and economic attributes of a city region such as Edmonton. Despite the lack of research interest, understanding the urban form preferences and social characteristics of Edmonton’s creative workers is important for planners and policy makers to develop relevant strategies aimed at diversifying its economy and becoming an attracting place for creative workers. According to the creative class theory, the creative economy operates and flourishes in the right spatial, cultural, and regulatory conditions. Understanding Edmonton’s creative class provides a unique case study to evaluate the claims suggested in creative class theory. This thesis reveals certain differences between the Edmonton case study and what is expected based on the understanding of creative class theory. This thesis also offers recommendations in light of those differences.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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