MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Downsview Park, Toronto: A part of the natural city of the 21st century

2006· article· en· W4205924788 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tony Genco

Bibliographic record

VenueEkistics and the new habitat · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Conservation and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)SustainabilityPolitical sciencePublic administrationCorporate governanceExecutive directorNatural resourceManagementNatural heritageLibrary scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author has been with Parc Downsview Park Inc. for close to five years. After only two years he has risen to lead the company as Executive Vice-President, which he has done for nearly three years through an extremely challenging period that included the change in governance and reorganization of the company and hosting two very large international events. Mr Genco has an extensive breadth of experience and skills in all facets of public affairs, communications, government relations and management. He is active in many charitable and community activities, and currently serves on the Board of Directors of the Woodbridge Agricultural Society, the Community Home Assistance for Seniors (CHATS), the Columbus Centre, Heritage Vaughan and is a member of the Canadian Sustainability Indicators Network. The text that follows is an edited and revised version of a paper presented at the international symposion on 'The Natural City," Toronto, 23-25 June, 2004, sponsored by the University of Toronto's Division of the Environment, Institute for Environmental Studies, and the World Society for Ekistics.

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1400.010

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.185 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEkistics and the new habitatSame topicEnvironmental Conservation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207