MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cities According to the For You Page

2025· article· en· W4408764480 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Eva Bird

Bibliographic record

VenueRural Review Ontario Rural Planning Development and Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt, Politics, and Modernism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper conducts a literature review on the impacts that social media platforms have on gentrification and digital placemaking in cities. The literature review analyzes a series of topics such as community building, big data, selective and exclusionary place marking, and creating new neighborhoods through rebranding on social media with case studies in Toronto, New York City and Los Angles. Recommendations to combat this form of gentrification and exclusionary place making include anti-displacement policies within municipal secondary plans with a case study on the Jane-Finch Secondary Plan and Urban Design Guidelines from the City of Toronto in response to the construction of the Finch light rail transit line being constructed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3100.169

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.258 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRural Review Ontario Rural Planning Development and PolicySame topicArt, Politics, and ModernismFrench-language works237,207