8. Karen Tei Yamashita’s Los Angeles, Tropic of Orange
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The official slogan by the Los Angeles Times that "Los Angeles Brings It All Together" (Soja 1989: 191) captures the paradigmatic and mythological impact of the well-studied 'postmetropolis' (Soja 2000).Once founded on Mexican territory, Los Angeles turned into "one of the most 'Anglo' of all American metropolises" in the 1920s (Abu-Lughod 1999: 134) before it developed into a world city with "extraordinary demographic and cultural heterogeneity" (Soja 2000: 227) and the highest American rate of foreign-born population (33 percent) (Anisef et al 2003: 3).At the turn of the millennium, the global city was, and still is, due to its great ethnic diversity, both, the unofficial Mexican American capital (Ortiz 1996: 247) and the Third World capital (Rieff 1991).Los Angeles serves as a prototype (Beauregard 2003: 7) of the modern global city (Sawhney 2002: 5).In terms of geography, infrastructure, and size, Los Angeles is considered a "fragmented metropolis par excellence" (Fogelson 1967: 2).The "great big freeway" (Beveridge et al 2003: 49) is the global city's nickname and governing structure, stressing the importance of the automobile.Arising from a desert, the city constantly boosted itself to become the entertainment center of the world (Sudjic 1992: 80).However, the global city's politics, economy, and cultural diversity also supported the development of ethnic clusters and gated communities, lead to it becoming the American homeless capital in the 1980s (Halle 2003: 12), and sparked one of the most violent American interethnic ruptures: the 1992 Los Angeles riots.Los Angeles began to grow in the mid-nineteenth century when Toronto and New York have long been cities of regional or national importance.In 1835, Los Angeles officially became a city with around 1,000 residents, then still belonging to Mexico.With the Mexican-American War following the California gold rush,
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".