MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

It’s a Smart World? An Architectural Reflection on Smart Cities through Hannah Arendt’s Notion of the World

2022· article· en· W4285308870 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueArendt studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Studies and Postmodernism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflection (computer programming)AestheticsArchitectural engineeringArtSociologyArt historyEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper challenges the ideas beyond the application of smart technology in the urban environment by investigating the proposal for the waterfront of Toronto by Sidewalk Labs. Although the project has been cancelled in the first months of the COVID pandemic outbreak, it still offers a valuable case study, as it was developed by Sidewalk Labs, part of Alphabet Inc, the company behind, among others, Google. This paper focusses on the spatial, material, and political aspects of the proposal, which are investigated through an architectural reading of Hannah Arendt’s notion of the world. The paper reflects on the public spaces in the plan, and in particular to the ambition to make these spaces “responsive” to popular demand. This ideal is inherent to the most far-fledged convictions beyond smart cities. In contradiction to its promising images and wild ideas, this paper concludes that it silences the participants and diminishes the possibility of active participation in the built environment.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.223 · 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