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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ‘urban village’, as it has come to be known since the 1980s, has very little to do with the rural. This coupling of terms, however, evokes a longer history of attempts to marry the urban with the rural, without either losing their distinctive attributes. This article traces this genealogy to Patrick Geddes's conceptualisation of the term in India, and focusses the analysis on two projects: the 1930 ‘Green City’ proposal by the constructivists Moisei Ginzburg and Mikhail Barshch, and the planning of Dodoma, Tanzania’a post-colonial capital, by the Canadian firm Project Planning Associates and the American James Rossant in the late 1970s. Both projects addressed nascent socialist societies, but the former was part of an industrialisation campaign while the latter was part of a villagisation campaign. By re-imagining the village as a component that can be integrated into the city, both aimed at a socio-economic reconfiguration of the town-country relationship on a territorial scale. Reconsidering the term ‘urban village’ as part of a broader history of urban-rural planning emphasises how experiments in the Global South, as well as other locations outside the professional hegemonic centre, shed new light on the discipline's core assumptions about the urban-rural divide.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it