Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gli stati nazionali sono stati considerati a lungo i protagonisti in un'arena internazionale in cui non era previsto alcun ruolo per le città. Tuttavia, il capitalismo contemporaneo e le trasformazioni della governance globale hanno reso i territori urbani snodi fondamentali degli scambi economici mondiali e nuovi protagonisti dei processi politici, nell'Unione europea e non solo. Governare grandi città non significa più quindi solo gestire servizi per il benessere dei cittadini ma anche sviluppare azioni e strategie di portata internazionale. Ma in che modo e con quali specifiche finalità? Il volume presenta i risultati di una ricerca comparativa sulle strategie internazionali di dieci città (Amsterdam, Birmingham, Budapest, Madrid, Manchester, Montréal, Parigi, Roma, Vilnius e Zurigo) cui hanno partecipato scienziati della politica, sociologi, geografi economici, storici ed urbanisti, mettendo a fuoco i fattori che ne spiegano le convergenze e le differenze.
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 | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.052 | 0.011 |
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".