MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199132415 · doi:10.3138/uhr-2020-0004

Les premières maisons shoebox montréalaises de Rosemont et de Villeray

2021· article· fr· W3199132415 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Guy Gaudreau

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban History Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

S'appuyant principalement sur les registres fonciers, les plans d'assurance incendie et les rôles des valeurs locatives de la ville de Montréal, cet article prend le relais d'une note de recherche publiée récemment par l'auteur dans cette revue. Le texte présente les maisons de type shoebox construites dans les quartiers Rosemont et Villeray et démontre que celles érigées à l'ouverture de ces quartiers, au début du XXe siècle, étaient principalement le fait de promettants-acquéreurs, c'est-à-dire d'individus qui, ayant obtenu des promesses de vente de la part des sociétés immobilières, ont pu ainsi mettre la main sur des lots à bâtir. Ces promesses de vente qui exigeaient un versement initial de quelques dollars pour accéder à la propriété ont permis notamment à de simples journaliers d'ériger sur leur lot de modestes et fort originales maisons. Par ailleurs, un coup d'œil sur celles construites au tournant des années 1920 dans ces mêmes quartiers démontre l'existence d'une autre catégorie de shoebox qui ne seraient plus l'apanage des plus humbles de la classe ouvrière.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban History ReviewSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207