MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242863590 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14648016

Keele Street Avenue Study

2021· preprint· en· W4242863590 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel A. Hahn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicUrban Agriculture and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlan (archaeology)Space (punctuation)Unit (ring theory)Agrarian societyEnvironmental planningGeographyTransport engineeringEngineeringArchaeologyComputer sciencePsychologyAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From its humble origins as a rural country road to its present form as a suburban arterial, the Keele Street Corridor - stretching from Wilson Avenue to Grandravine Drive - has long served the transportation and day-to-day needs of North York and Toronto residents. The following study presents the corridor as it was, as it is, and as it could be. Through a series of recommendations, this report intends to offer a vision of the corridor as an urbanized, livable, and beautiful corridor in keeping with the Official Plan’s Avenues policies and based on the following principles: Locating new and denser housing types that encourage a mix of use, make efficient use of lands, frame the right-of-way, are appropriately massed and attractively designed. Supporting the creation of complete communities that provide a mix of unit types and offers a range of affordability. Creating high-quality and well-planned public spaces that retain existing residents, attract new residents, encourage interaction and animation, and provide the infrastructure required by all. Prioritizing opportunities for greening within the right-of-way, including planting new trees, creating new parks with frontage along Keele Street, planters, and green buildings. Reconfiguring and civilizing Keele Street into a complete street that serves as a living space for its residents, assigns priority to safety, and encourages active transportation and transit. The report is divided into two parts: The first part - BACKGROUND - contains a description of the corridor’s boundaries, its evolution from an agrarian community, presents the current built environment, and reviews the existing policy layers affecting the Corridor. The second part - PLAN - contains recommendations related to the future development and revitalization of the corridor related to future land uses, built form, development, public realm, parks and open space, and transportation network. Key words: Avenue, urban design, urbanization, suburbs, mid-rise building, corridor.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2070.038

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUrban Agriculture and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207