Workers'-cottage and minimal-bungalow districts in Oakland and Berkeley, California, 1870-1945
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Case studies in West Oakland and West Berkeley, California - blue-collar districts built between 1870 and 1945 in the San Francisco Bay Area - exemplify two contrasting sets of urban forms. Within each set, house types and block plans share similar spatial rules. Workers' cottages and workers'-cottage districts, typically begun up to 1900, rely on mixed uses and very little spatial specialization, with ad hoc additions to the dwellings, varied street setbacks and lot lines, mixed land uses, and very little uniformity. In contrast, the dwellings and blocks of minimal-bungalow districts, typically built between 1900 and 1945, are constructed all at once and in a permanent form, with interior spaces that are specialized, hierarchical, socially zoned, and separated by hallways; the blocks have uniform setbacks and lots, and restrictive covenants. The differences between these two forms illustrate closely-intertwined oppositions of twentieth-century modernity that North Americans are still debating: the desirability of urban form based on individual decision-making rather than official control of experts; the benefits of mixture and overlapping uses rather than uniformity and hierarchical separation; and the tensions between obviously temporary urban surroundings on the one hand and visually finished, permanent forms and more predictable real estate values on the other.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".