MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171911341 · doi:10.5518/100/55

Bury market: shopping destination and community hub

2021· article· en· W3171911341 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Paul Waley, Myfanwy Taylor, Sara González, Andy Newing, Lisa Buckner, R Wilkinson

Bibliographic record

VenueWhite Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrbanization and City Planning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilLaidlaw Foundation
KeywordsAdvertisingBusinessMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report provides a wide range of new evidence to show how Bury Market successfully fulfils an important role in providing affordable and high quality food and a range of other goods, as well as serving as a supportive and welcoming community asset, in particular for the elderly and lower-income residents of Bury. It is one of three reports documenting evidence from the Markets4People research project1 about the wide-ranging economic, social and cultural benefits produced by three of the UK’s largest and strongest traditional retail markets. Building on previous research, the reports bring a new focus on the importance of markets from the perspective of their existing customers. In each of the three case study markets, the research involved a survey of 500 market users (capturing a representative sample in terms of age, gender and ethnicity), two focus groups with selected user groups and around 10 interviews with key local actors, to contextualise the findings. Bury Market was selected for this research as one of three exemplary case studies well-placed to demonstrate the wide-ranging economic, social and cultural benefits of traditional markets in the UK. Bury Market is one of the best known markets in the North of England. A very large market with approximately 365 stalls, it has frequently won awards, including most recently being voted Britain’s Favourite Market in 2019. It is one of the very few markets in the country that forms the principal attraction of its town or city centre. At the same time, however, the Market faces pressures to modernise as part of wider plans for Bury’s town centre. In 2019 Bury Council established a Task Group to review the Market with the aim of providing improvements involving some new facilities. The Market’s connectivity with other key sites in the town centre is also being examined, with a view to improving its accessibility from transport hubs. In this context, our research has focused on understanding the existing customers’ experience of the Market, including economic, social and cultural aspects, as well as wider governance issues.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.004

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWhite Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York)Same topicUrbanization and City PlanningFrench-language works237,207