MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766907090 · doi:10.1111/gec3.12349

Promoting innovation locally: Municipal regulation as barrier or boost?

2017· article· en· W2766907090 on OpenAlexafffund
Shauna Brail

Bibliographic record

VenueGeography Compass · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConvergence (economics)Key (lock)Political scienceEconomic systemEconomyBusinessEconomic growthEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper examines a seemingly abrupt series of shifts that have the potential to completely transform cities as a direct result of a rising digital economy. It takes into account the convergence of research from three areas of study: (a) urban concentrations of innovative activities, (b) the platform economy, and (c) municipal regulation. A case study discussion about the role of municipal regulation in ride‐hailing, with particular emphasis on Uber, highlights debates regarding the challenges faced by municipalities amidst the prospect of renewed innovative activities and concomitant economic growth, alongside unknown risks. The paper concludes with a discussion about questions and approaches to understanding innovative activities in light of the emerging platform economy, and reviews key questions regarding the role that municipal regulatory decisions play in shaping the twenty‐first century city.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.016
Scholarly communication0.0120.006
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeography CompassSame topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207