Belfast: rebranding the ‘Renaissance City’: from ‘the Troubles’ to Titanic Quarter®
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the wake of the Good Friday Agreement in 1998, opening the way for a cessation of thirty years of low-grade civil war, and taking some inspiration from Lord Rogers’s Urban Task Force (UTF) report the following year, Belfast, at the turn of the millennium, proclaimed itself as the ‘Renaissance City’ (BCC 2002). The city can be forgiven for the oversight that this epithet had already been claimed by Detroit in the rebuilding drive that eventually followed its image collapse after the urban riots in 1967. Events in that city were subsequently to mock such a rebranding of place (Neill 2006a). Belfast, as this chapter will argue, has more hope, but remains afflicted with a lack of real self-confidence and a poverty of aspiration in asserting its identity as a unique place. A kinder critic might point out that expectations must be tempered with an awareness of the road already travelled. As late as 1992 the Belfast novelist Glenn Patterson, in his book Fat Lad, described the city’s tourist image as a ‘ghoulish fairground with a murderous significance ascribed to every street corner’ (Patterson 1992: 203). This is in stark contrast to at least the physical renaissance, which Belfast, over fifteen years later, presents to the world. The new Belfast brand logo, launched in 2008, celebrating this turn around, but with lack of originality in the concept (a red welcoming heart sign with echoes of New York’s brand), was justifiably met with an ambivalent response (O’Hara and Wilkie 2008).
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".