Claiming the Sky; Rethinking High-Rise Development in the City of Toronto
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Toronto is following the footsteps of populated urban cities like New York through the extrusion of skyscrapers, transforming Toronto into one of the densest cities in North America. Rapid development of residential density has produced a mono-centric core in which density is favoured over sustainable social neighbourhoods. This “gold rush” of condominium development has superseded the production of public amenity infrastructure to support the density added. Limited vacant lands, coupled with rising housing prices and the ever-increasing population, points to a potential crisis in which the long-term sustainability of these towers is questioned. Towers within the core can no longer afford to maintain the existing inflexible mono-culture, but must include public amenity infrastructure which supports the rapid density and diverse populous. The presence of the tower, soaring far beyond the ground plain, has further amplified the social and physical disconnect of the cities fabric and its inhabitants, while removing the responsibility from developers taking advantage of these trends. \n \nThis thesis aims to investigate the production of tower “neighbourhoods” through the hybridization of vertical public and private spaces. The proposal aims to question the current high rise trends and limited public amenity infrastructure within the city and provide an alternative model for porous vertical neighbourhoods in which public amenity infrastructure is used to achieve social sustainability within Toronto’s core.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".