MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Metropolitan regions: New challenges for an urbanizing China

2004· article· en· W4250418478 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Edward Leman

Bibliographic record

VenueEkistics and the new habitat · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Zones and Regional Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaBeijingMetropolitan areaGeographyUrban planningWork (physics)Political scienceEconomic growthRegional scienceEconomyEngineeringArchaeologyCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author is President of Chreod Ltd., a consulting firm he founded in 1985 in Canada. Since 1988 the firm has worked on over 80 urban and regional development consulting projects in over 70 cities across China. Mr Leman's work has largely been on strategic development planning and policy development for municipal governments in China, and for the World Bank and Asian Development Bank. He has worked in Shanghai,Tianjin, Beijing, Chongqing, and in Anhui, Hebei, Henan, Gansu, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Guangdong, Guangxi, Guizhou and Sichuan Provinces. Mr Leman has published articles on China urban issues in Ekistics, the Asian Wall Street Journal, the World Bank's Urban Age Journal, and the Far Eastern Economic Review's China Trade Report. Mr Leman is a member of the World Society for Ekistics and served as a member of its Executive Council from 1995-1998. This article is derived from his presentation 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, and a subsequent paper that he delivered at the World Bank Urban Research Symposium held in April 2005 in Brasilia.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEkistics and the new habitatSame topicEconomic Zones and Regional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207