MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pandemic Pop-Ups and the Performance of Legality

2021· book-chapter· en· W4205224448 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexandra Flynn, Amelia Thorpe

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicy Press eBooks · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Spaces through Art
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNSW Department of Planning,Industry and Environment
KeywordsPrinciple of legalityPandemicPolitical scienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Space (punctuation)SociologyMedia studiesGeographyPolitical economyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid reallocation of traffic space for walking and cycling has generated much applause, with commentators celebrating these shifts as the start of long-term change toward more liveable, sustainable and inclusive cities. However, these shift towards such pandemic pop-up infrastructures are precarious. With an emphasis on speed over process, pop-ups have invariably been deployed without oversight or engagement, and rarely involving the voices of racialized or vulnerable people. Focusing on the cities of Toronto (Canada) and Sydney (Australia), this chapter argues that the significance of pop-ups extends beyond immediate infrastructure needs in response to a pandemic, to how cities govern more generally.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

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 studies0.0000.002
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolicy Press eBooksSame topicPublic Spaces through ArtFrench-language works237,207