Bibliographic record
Abstract
The extrapolation of current population trends indicates that the future will experience a huge influx of population that will return and settle in the city (Gallagher, 2013). This thesis is an investigation that attempts to incorporate the desirable qualities of rural living into the urban living condition and result in an alternative high-density residential solution for the future. The issue of urban densification and high-density development has become highly debated in the past decade – this thesis engages with the debate through a critical examination of the current status quo approach towards high-density residential development. A comparative study of the living conditions of the glorified rural idyll, the criticized suburban sprawl and the concentrated contemporary urban condition was undertaken in order to identify the advantages and disadvantages of these living environments. This comparison assisted in the creation of a set of design criteria and design elements which emerged from the research and were further investigated through a series of diverse precedent studies. The critical inquiry into the status quo and the varying living environments was used to define a humane design approach in a reinterpretation of high-density residential living in downtown Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".