Bibliographic record
Abstract
The giant city of today is a unique phenomenon. Never before have such acute problems of government, the provision of essential services, planning, social life, and civilized living arisen from uncontrolled urbanization. In the West and in the East, in the more developed and in the less developed countries, in capitalist and communist states, the great metropolis represents a problem of the first importance which challenges the statesman, the official, the town planner, the political scientist, the sociologist and, above all, the intelligent citizen. The editor has here assembled an authoritative series of studies describing the growth, significance, government, politics adn planning of twenty-four great cities of the world. They show how these widely scattered cities faced essentially similar problems. Each study deals with the actual working of one city in the 1950s, how its elective adn executive bodies are organized, the kind of political forces which motivate their activities, the scope and character of the municipal services, how they are finiance. The cities dealt with include Bombay, Amsterdam, Moscow, Montreal, Stockholm, Rome, New York, London, Sydney and Tokyo. This book was first published in 1954.
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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.014 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".