MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810580588 · doi:10.1177/1078087420934047

Starchitects in Bohemia: An Exploration of Cultural Cities from the “Top-Down” and “Bottom-Up”

2020· article· en· W2810580588 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Affairs Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSustainable Urban and Rural Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTop-down and bottom-up designGeologyGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urban scholars have devoted significant attention to the “cultural city,” but less attention has been paid to how different forms of culture relate to each other and to the larger urban environment. In this article, we compare two quintessential forms of culture-led urbanization that represent opposite ends on a spectrum: iconic architecture and neo-bohemia. While iconic architecture is a “top-down” approach to culture involving large budgets, elite “starchitects,” and powerful clients, neo-bohemia tends to be a “bottom-up” phenomenon formed as individual artists gravitate toward particular neighborhoods, establishing arts scenes. Using a combination of neighborhood case studies and national-level quantitative analysis, we investigate the ecological relationship between these two phenomena. In doing so, we provide new insights into the geographic and social structure of the cultural 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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.240 · 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