Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hackworth and Smith’s ‘Changing State of Gentrification’, published in 2001 and focused on New York City, is a definitive landmark. As you read these words, ‘New York City 2001’ might seem distant coordinates in the accelerating time‐space of knowledge production, but it’s not very far when understood in the time horizon of humanity’s urban evolution. Hackworth and Smith’s work helps us rethink today’s theoretical frontiers (especially postcolonial attacks on gentrification theory as a neocolonial imposition on the Global South) as well as long‐forgotten traditions. Ruth Glass’s critique of gentrification in 1964 was already a global, postcolonial challenge to the imperial epistemic violence that consolidated the West – neoliberal doctrines of human competition premised in nineteenth‐century social Darwinism and eugenics. Understanding the changing state of gentrification today requires confronting the planetary politics of urbanised human competition and hijacked theories of human evolution, and deciding what kinds of humans we wish to become.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".