MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255410739 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14646891

The TIFF with TIEG: an evaluation of the City of Toronto's IMIT Program

2021· preprint· en· W4255410739 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sachin Persaud

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Policy
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncentiveTax incentiveProperty taxProperty (philosophy)BusinessKey (lock)MarketingPublic economicsEconomicsTax reformMarket economyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Facing an increasingly integrated and competitive global economy, local governments have developed property tax incentive programs to entice businesses to build and locate domestically. This paper offers an account of how one specific property tax incentive program – the City of Toronto's Imagination, Manufacturing, Innovation and Technology (IMIT) program – came into existence and how it has evolved into the present day. An evaluation criteria analysis that builds on Hemson Consulting's 2017 review of IMIT follows. A review of literature and policy culminates in a list of recommendations for the City to consider as it strives to achieve its economic development objectives. Key words: property tax, incentive, economic development, employment</p>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRegional Development and PolicyFrench-language works237,207