Bibliographic record
Abstract
Toronto's waterfront is at a critical juncture.The area is undergoing a much-anticipated revitalization in the form of major public and private development.Yet in the shadow of this latest wave of change, and a rich, complex, and important history, Toronto's waterfront has a long legacy of unfulfilled plans, conflicting interests, and missed opportunities.Social and economic developments have gone awry, biophysical environments have been damaged, and ecological relationships have been upset.In cities around the world, policymakers, planners, and developers have looked to waterfronts as spaces of promise and prime locations for large-scale development within global urban hierarchies.This collection of essays looks at these processes of development and brings together different disciplinary perspectives around the theme of nature-society relations.The volume features analyses of Toronto's waterfront past and present, and draws on insights from urban and environmental history, urban planning, political ecology, human geography, sustainability and environmental studies, governance and politics, resource management, and population biology.Contributors from this wide range of disciplines study and interpret the ways environmental, economic, and political processes mutually transform one another on the city's waterfront.The authors examine waterfront struggles over the past one hundred and fifty years, while also attending to the underlying biophysical conditions that have shaped and constrained possibilities.Together the essays address the interdependence of social and natural processes in myriad ways, exploring the potential and limitations of human intervention within these dynamic spaces.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.844 | 0.606 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".