MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122449392

Municipal Reform on the Island of Montreal: Tensions Between Two Majority Groups in a Multicultural City

2003· preprint· en· W3122449392 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sébastien Arcand, Danielle Juteau, Sirma Bilge, Francine Lemire

Bibliographic record

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2003
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Social FundInstitut National de la Recherche AgronomiqueEuropean Commission
KeywordsPoliticsMulticulturalismAutonomyEthnic groupDecentralizationPolitical sciencePosition (finance)GeographyEconomyBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For several years now, many cities across the world have undergone, for administrative and political reasons, mergers that have considerably reduced the number of municipalities on a given territory. This tendency affects various urban contexts, as evidenced by recent mergers in Toronto, Ottawa and Halifax (Canada), Baltimore (United States), and in other countries such as Scotland, Australia and England. Quebec has not escaped this trend, and since January 1st 2002, six major urban areas were created. While mergers now constitute a familiar occurrence, the processes they entail differ considerably from site to site, questioning existing power structures, administrative procedures, and modes of belonging. In Quebec, the case of Montreal stands out, because of its strategic economic position, and also because of the historical and often conflictual relations between its diverse ethnic and linguistic collectivities. This paper examines how the merger of twenty-nine municipalities on the island of Montreal into a single city now composed of twenty-seven boroughs, modifies the relations between the two dominant majorities and, more specifically, the capacity of English Canadians to control their institutions and daily affairs. Does this transformation, which involves the disappearance of municipalities, some of which were governed by English Canadians and other Anglophones, follow the trend observed in Quebec since the sixties, involving a loss in the latter's institutional completeness, organizational capacity, and spheres of autonomy?

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0370.024
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconstor (Econstor)Same topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207