Do Small Towns Have Big Smart City Dreams?
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
Although many angles of the smart cities’ movement have been well-studied by academia, a gap remains in our understanding of how municipal policymakers understand and apply the concept in their localized contexts—particularly how community size affects smart city ambitions. In 2017, Infrastructure Canada announced its Smart City Challenge (SCC), asked communities across Canada—municipalities, local or regional governments, and Indigenous communities—to design creative and innovative solutions to address any societal problem using any data and connected technology solution. The application process was a de facto survey that generated a unique, publicly available dataset from the 199 applicant communities, big and small alike. We find that larger communities submit more ambitious proposals to use latest technologies to address social equity and inclusion concerns through expanded operations, whereas smaller, more rural municipalities focus more on basic infrastructure and services. Though there is overlap, their dreams differ.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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