Toward a sensory approach to Tactical Urbanism
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
In the last decades, Tactical Urbanism has emerged as a bottom-up approach addressing the state of abandonment or underuse of problematic urban areas through ephemeral, temporary interventions aiming to trigger positive and long-term benefits to derelict areas. While Tactical Urbanism interventions usually have a strong visual component, in this article we focus on the possibilities offered by sound-based tactical interventions informed by participatory design processes engaging residents and local actors of neighborhoods undergoing transformation. Highlighting the role of city users’ sonic experience in the everyday environment, we illustrate how a sound-based approach to Tactical urbanism can help exploring alternative means of questioning neoliberal urbanism, especially by supporting the livability of residents and city users beyond the primary drive toward visitors’ attractiveness. To support our argument, we present and discuss the outcomes of a two-year project in the Montreal’s Quartier des Spectacles, a neighborhood undergoing drastic social, spatial, and economic transformations. Here, after a first ethnographic and sonic investigation, we organized two participatory workshops focused on the sonic experience of the neighborhood, which culminated in the realization of a sound installation.
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