MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321376588 · doi:10.1177/08912424231155969

COVID-19, the New Urban Crisis, and Cities: How COVID-19 Compounds the Influence of Economic Segregation and Inequality on Metropolitan Economic Performance

2023· article· en· W4321376588 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Florida, Todd Gabe

Bibliographic record

VenueEconomic Development Quarterly · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional resilience and development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)InequalityPandemicDemographic economicsSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakEconomicsEconomic recoveryDevelopment economicsGeographyEconomic growthMedicineMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the connection between measures of a U.S. metropolitan area's new urban crisis (i.e., unaffordable housing, economic inequality, and residential segregation) and its year-over-year employment change in the period immediately before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results show that measures of the new urban crisis did not generally have a statistically significant association with year-over-year employment change between January and September of 2020, which captures the period before COVID-19 and the beginning of the pandemic (e.g., shutdown). The severity of a region's economic segregation and inequality, however, are associated with higher rates of employment decline in the early recovery months of October to December of 2020. These findings suggest that places that rate worse for indicators of the new urban crisis were less able to recover from the negative economic shocks related to COVID-19.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconomic Development QuarterlySame topicRegional resilience and developmentFrench-language works237,207