MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Planning the emergent Basque megalopolis as a natural multi-metropolitan complex

2004· article· en· W4245036949 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lawrence D. Mann

Bibliographic record

VenueEkistics and the new habitat · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrbanism, Landscape, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaLibrary sciencePresentation (obstetrics)MegalopolisLatin AmericansUrban planningRegional planningPolitical scienceWork (physics)Position (finance)Public administrationRegional scienceManagementSociologyHistoryGeographyEngineeringArchaeologyLawCivil engineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author is Professor Emeritus of Planning, Regional Development and Public Policy at the University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA and Biarritz, France. He was formerly Professor and Chairman of the Department of City and Regional Planning at Harvard and before that held a similar position at Rutgers University. He has been a visiting professor at five different Latin American universities. He was for ten years the Review Editor of the Journal of the American Institute of Planners and was the initial compiling editor of Ekistics magazine. Professor Mann was national Chairman of the American Institute of Certified Planners, and was elected Fellow of the Institute in 2003. His research into Basque Planning has involved several months of field-work in the Basque region every year since 1999. The paper that follows is based on a presentation that he gave 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEkistics and the new habitatSame topicUrbanism, Landscape, and Tourism StudiesFrench-language works237,207