MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2655311895

Transit-Oriented Development (TOD): Vector or Mirage of Metropolitan Planning and Governance Transformations in the Greater Montreal Area?

2015· article· en· W2655311895 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicolas Douay, Olivier Roy-Baillargeon

Bibliographic record

VenueFlux · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaPoliticsCompromiseUrban planningCorporate governanceNexus (standard)Public transportPolitical scienceSustainabilityRegional sciencePolycentricityPublic administrationEconomic geographyBusinessGeographyEngineeringCivil engineeringFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Land use and transport integration has been an objective of the Greater Montreal Area for decades. Transit-oriented development (TOD) constitutes its most recent incarnation. This analysis of the ins and outs of the resort to this concept highlights the collective learning dynamics in the spatial planning of the area since 2001, with the creation of the Montreal Metropolitan Community (MMC). It reveals that the political discourse and especially the content of public policies on urban planning and public transportation have significantly changed, and now position TOD at the nexus of metropolitan processes. The apparent intention of urban densification that accompanies it is the result of an unprecedented political compromise among stakeholders of the region. However, this staging of a virtuous turn toward sustainability raises a host of questions on its potential impact on the territory, planning practices and political dynamics of metropolitan Montreal.

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 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)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFluxSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207