MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611412246 · doi:10.1177/1206331217707473

The Production of Public Space in a Small Canadian City: An Analysis of Spatial Practices in the Revitalizing of Galt Gardens

2017· article· en· W2611412246 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSpace and Culture · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Spaces through Art
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDowntownPublic spaceSpace (punctuation)RecreationProduction (economics)Public parkSociologyGeographyPolitical scienceLawArchaeologyEngineeringArchitectural engineeringEnvironmental planning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article critically assesses a series of spatial practices implicated in the spatial production of a revitalized public park in downtown Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada. I find that the park’s revitalization tends to encourage short-term, recreational crowd practice. Specifically, I show how recent material improvements, such as the replacement of park benches and the addition of a plaza and water feature, distinguish between “positive” and “negative” users of the park. I begin the analysis by using Barthes’s influential work on signification to discuss four murals that came to frame the park’s most recent revitalization. Considered as “materials of myth,” I argue that these murals both commemorate and reproduce a depoliticized version of local history, one that relies on certain forgettings. I find that the widely celebrated revitalization of Galt Gardens hinges in part on practices of exclusion and racialization as forms of urban purification.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.282 · 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