MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Reconstruction of Downtown Beirut in the Context of Political Geography

2011· article· en· W2606378012 on OpenAlex
Heiko Schmid

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueArab world geographer · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East Politics and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDowntownMonopolyPoliticsContext (archaeology)Spanish Civil WarEconomySociologyPolitical sciencePolitical economyLawHistoryArchaeologyEconomicsMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Downtown Beirut was partly destroyed in the Lebanese civil war from 1975 to 1990. The “green line,” the demarcation line between Christian East and Muslim West Beirut, runs right through downtown. After the end of the war about 80% of the buildings in the downtown area were quickly demolished to make room for a new (post-)modern reconstruction. Naturally, this creation of a tabula rasa in the city centre of Beirut was strongly criticized by the former tenants and owners, as well as by architects, city planners, and academics. Several interest groups were formed and tried to influence the further planning of Beirut's downtown. Finally, however, the main initiator and driving force behind the process of reconstruction, the Lebanese businessman and later prime minister, Rafiq al-Hariri, was able to gain acceptance and to establish a monopoly over decisions. The following article investigates from a political-geographical point of view the role of the different participants in the conflict surrounding Beirut'...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.242 · 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