MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091242290 · doi:10.17645/up.v5i3.3679

Planning for Local Economic Development: Research into Policymaking and Practice

2020· article· en· W3091242290 on OpenAlex
Evan Cleave, Godwin Arku

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 Planning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional Economics and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZoningUrban planningProsperityVulnerability (computing)Corporate governancePolitical scienceEconomic growthLocal economic developmentEnvironmental planningRegional scienceSociologyGeographyEconomicsEngineeringManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thematic issue of <em>Urban Planning</em> brings together a collection of seven articles that explore and critically engage with contemporary issues with local economic development and connect with the broader fields of urban development and planning. The articles presented here provide a complementary mix of broader conceptualizations and research and narrower case-studies which draw from a range of geographies. Contributions include the development and application of a vulnerability and risk measures for economic prosperity; examinations of how urban planning and zoning are used as tools to address industrial decline and spur new forms of economic production; complementing investigations into the role of innovation within local economic development examining the role of public and private institutions as well as broad and targeted policy interventions; and the relationship between ‘big-tech,’ economic development and urban planning and governance.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.771

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.194
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.157 · 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