State and the reproduction of capital : urban renewal in Thunder Bay, 1965-1973 / by David Peerla. --
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this inquiry is to examine the relationship of \nthe state to the reproduction of capital. The thesis will consider \nthe question of the relationship of the state to capital at the \ntheoretical and empirical level, in a case study of urban renewal \nin Thunder Bay. \nAt the theoretical level v;e will consider; (a) the relationship \nof the state and capital accumulation; (b) collective consumption; \n(c) the general necessity of state intervention into the production \nof the built environment; (d) the state and crises in capital accumulation \nand (e) urban protest movements. At the empirical level we will discuss: \n(a) a particular state agency responsible for regulation of the built \nenvironment - the Ontario Municipal Board and (b) The Local State. \nFinally, we will bring these theoretical and empirical analyses together \nin considering the case of urban renewal in Thunder Bay. \nThe thesis concludes with a discussion of the necessity of an \nintegrated theory of the state which is a combination of both instrumentalism \nand structuralism. The concept of structurally induced instrumentality \nis offered as a possible resolution of the structuralist versus \ninstrumentalism dilemma.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".