Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the end of the 19th century, the world has experienced a dynamic shift from traditional living arrangements to a more modern approach, regional habitation - the rise of suburbanization. Suburbanization allowed, for the first time in history, the general population to comfortably relocate their families and lifestyles to the threshold of developed areas (cities, metropolitan areas) while maintaining moderate accessibility to local amenities and a sense of personal space (suburbanization). Prior to this phenomenon, the majority of people lived outside of the city cores, typically in rural areas with farming and agriculture as a means of income and survival (Harris, R., 2004). This lifestyle was demanding and tedious, but an integral part of development. Though there is no specific start point suburban development was an inevitable outcome of the influx of population and industrial technologies. This new concept does have many points of origin ranging from the North American expansion during the industrial revolution to the European exodus due to famine or governmental regimes. The summation of these conditions brought Canada the United States and other developed countries to a pivotal point in history that would continue to today. The purpose of this report is to provide a detailed understanding about the timeline of the suburbanization movement and accurately depict the relevant events. The common misperception is that the suburban lifestyle is typically viewed as the 1950's answer to a modern lifestyle catering to automobile ownership and independence. However this perception while partially correct is actually the aftermath of century long regional development immigration and industry's effect on the social and economic environments. The objective then is to document depict and compare the various aspects that influenced the suburbanization movement and define the specific events that shaped the course of both countries positively and negatively. When taking into account the amount of historical documentation there are many aspects to consider when trying to define the suburbanization movement: What it is? How did it come to be so prevalent? What where the significant moments? Why was it so important to national development? To understand the movement and in the interest of relatability there are two countries in particular that share mutual backgrounds and historical commonality: Canada and the United States. These two countries shared similar views and developed concurrently during the late 1800's through to post World War II. Key political and social aspects surrounding suburbanization will be reviewed in a common time period mutual to both nations. Thus this report shall examine the period from the middle of the 19th century through to the post war 'baby boom' era during the early 1950's where each country demonstrated substantial regional development hardships and unintentional outcomes arising from the concept of suburbanization.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".