Evolving suburban form: dispersion or recentralization?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transformations in both the approach to suburban growth expressed in planning documents and the reality of suburban development are examined. The North American suburban model, characterized by near universal reliance on the automobile, abundant land consumption, rigorous functional specialization and a dispersal of employment, retail and services, was pieced together between the late 1940s and the early 1960s. While plans from this period concentrated on the infrastructure and regulatory fundamentals of this emerging model, subsequent plans expressed growing disenchantment with this form of development, culminating in the formulation of a new vision of the suburb that breaks with the early post-war model. Examination of a Toronto suburban transect, with layers of development dating from the late 1940s to the present, reveals a mismatch between the profound suburban transformations proposed in plans and actual suburban form. The paper concludes with an assessment of the relative importance of land-use inertia and change. The possibility of an intensified, recentralized suburb that is less automobile dependent is considered.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 it