MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199745085 · doi:10.1177/08912424211036180

Big Tech on the Block: Examining the Impact of Tech Campuses on Local Housing Markets in the San Francisco Bay Area

2021· article· en· W3199745085 on OpenAlex

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

VenueEconomic Development Quarterly · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpeculationReal estateResidential real estateTransaction dataDatabase transactionBusinessBayReal estate developmentSilicon valleyFinanceEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid growth of tech company headquarters such as Apple, Facebook, and Google could potentially put new pressure on the housing market in adjacent residential neighborhoods, in the form of housing price appreciation and real estate speculation. This article examines the relationship between the big tech corporate campuses and Silicon Valley/San Francisco housing markets using the Zillow (ZTRAX) transaction and tax assessor data. The authors compare real estate activity adjacent to new company locations with activity in nearby areas, conducting a difference-in-differences analysis to estimate changes in housing prices and speculation. They find that housing prices increase overall by an additional 7.1% in the immediate vicinity of the tech campus 2 years after arrival, with wide variation across campuses. The authors also identify significant real estate speculation occurring prior to firms’ arrival. This suggests that cities should take a proactive role in mitigating tech firm impacts on vulnerable adjacent neighborhoods.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.187 · 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