Edmonton, a resource city: urban development examined through unrecognized resource legacies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Edmonton, Alberta, is currently associated with oil and gas industries, yet its history as a resource community is in many ways not only obscure but also influential, even key to the understanding of its urban development. Timber harvesting, brick making but most importantly local coal mining powered and structured Edmonton's growth. Several communities were key to this foundation, ultimately becoming hosts for many other city sustaining functions. River flats communities like Riverdale and Cloverdale were vulnerable to floods. Beverly, an official coal mining town had a prolonged history of struggle. McCauley was home to the Federal prison; resident prisoners mined the coal beneath Riverdale. Coal mining in Edmonton was replaced by informal and social housing, waste management, major transportation projects, and finally development of Edmonton's River Valley parks system. Edmonton provides a case study for expanding the resource communities narrative. Key communities in Edmonton's early years show how coal mining influenced landscape, economic shifts, and relationships within a growing city. A combined process of GIS analysis, local media analysis, and literature review provides a framework for understanding how Edmonton, a large northern city initially shared the experiences and difficulties of small resource communities in earlier years of growth and development. Large and diverse cities which seemingly transcended their extractive origin can be analyzed through the lens of resource legacies, which can reveal, as in Edmonton, that largely forgotten histories of vanished resources can mark cities and their planning in profound ways. We therefore speak of opaque resource cities.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".