Urban Art Hotels and Gentrification: A Comparative Analysis of Toronto and London, Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article uses critical geography and cultural studies theories to examine the conversion of three low-income residential hotels into art hotels: the Embassy Hotel in London, Ontario, and the Cameron House and the Gladstone Hotel, both in Toronto. Situating these establishments in the context of culture-led regeneration, I describe the different stages of economic decline and prosperity in the surrounding districts. I develop current literature by analyzing the social and class inequities underlying art-based rebuilding projects that have driven up property values and displaced the urban poor. I suggest that in all three cases the cultural readaptation of the hotels formed part of commercial development and perpetuated the attendant disparities underlying regeneration schemes. However, the proprietors also supported art collectives that engaged in critical cultural practices by reclaiming public city spaces as sites of discord and dissent. In assessing exhibitions and performances, I examine the conflicts and tensions surrounding creative initiatives that both enfranchised and disenfranchised neighbourhood communities. It is precisely the paradoxical workings of art-led revitalization that define the cultural and political histories of hotel redevelopment projects in downtown cores.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".