MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410873139 · doi:10.1080/17549175.2025.2508792

Pedestrianizing strategies and street liveliness: a case study of Montreal (Canada)

2025· article· en· W4410873139 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Thi‐Thanh‐Hiên Pham, Huu Lieu Dang, Philippe Brodeur-Ouimet

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Urbanism International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHigh StreetWalkabilityAdvertisingEnvironmental planningEconomic geographyAestheticsBusinessGeographyCivil engineeringEngineeringArtBuilt environmentArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pedestrianization has become one of the strategies privileged, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, to handle social distancing measures and boost the local economy. Yet there is little knowledge about street design impacts people’s usage as well as how pedestrianization is conceived by local governments. In this paper, we examine two pedestrianized streets in Montreal (Canada), having different goals and design. In summer 2021, we conducted a systematic observation of street users and a review of policy, design, and press documents. In both streets, we found design important in explaining the presence of large groups in private consumption spaces and small groups in segments with rich public furniture. Local life explained street usage of homeless people and seniors, while cultural activities increased large groups. We underline the preponderance of economy-oriented goals in the municipality’s strategies which favour crowdedness but potentially undermine social functions of streets. We call for more attention to the public realm in and around pedestrian streets in order to make space for vulnerable populations and to enhance the sense of community. As such we hope to contribute to an inclusive streetscape reallocation and inform practitioners in creating lively public spaces.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score0.753

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Urbanism International Research on Placemaking and Urban SustainabilitySame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207