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
It is without ceasing that urban spaces witness the cycle of their \nbirth and death. Like the waves of an ocean repeatedly crashing \ninto and withdrawing from the shoreline, the city’s sphere of \nproduction and human activity consume our environment, only \nto abandon it in subsequence, leaving behind, in a state of ruin, \nvestiges of civilization, waiting to be reinvigorated again by \nthose who deem it useful or those who wish to capitalize by it. \nToronto’s inner-city frontier, that is to say its residential \nlaneway network which runs through the historic “park lot” grid \nsystem, has experienced its share of public/private use and \nsubsequent abandonment. After having once hosted living units, \ncommercial properties and other public amenities, the laneways \ngradually saw their abandonment due to by-law adjustment \nand technological innovation. This partial abandonment has \ntransformed them into a public terrain vague and heterotopia \nwithin the “official” city. In their semi-abandoned condition, they \nhost wild plants, street art and semi-anonymous social activity. \nToday, redevelopment of laneways by means of laneway \nhousing construction and laneway activation for public use is \nbringing back an informal version of what once existed before. \nThis thesis explores residential laneways in their current terrain \nvague state as a way to celebrate their unproductive and “other” \ncondition, it highlights the various characteristics that make it \nstand out within the urban landscape of Toronto and finally it \nexplores the various forces that are working in transforming \nresidential laneways into a unique urban typology.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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