Group built housing from Berlin to Toronto: Exchanging housing concepts for sustainable residential development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ensuring the quality and sustainability of housing in Canadian cities is a significant challenge. In light of this challenge, new concepts and ideas have been proposed, often originating from international locales, for how to improve the delivery of housing relative to these objectives. This report critically examines the potential transposition of the concept of Baugruppen from Berlin to Toronto in a manner that reinforces the sustainable elements of the concept. First, the report evaluates the sustainability of Baugruppen, as currently implemented in Berlin, against a Quadruple Bottom Line evaluation framework. Second, it identifies areas and processes where the concept may be applied in the Greater Toronto Area. The report concludes that, while Baugruppen cannot be considered a scalable or radical solution to pressing housing issues, the concept offers certain opportunities to promote sustainable residential development practices. Additionally, the concept has a unique potential to integrate into mainstream housing delivery in the Canadian context, focusing specifically on the City of Toronto, due to the compatibility of Baugruppen with existing features of the housing system and the relative advantages of this concept over other modes of housing delivery. Ultimately, the report illuminates how certain modifications to the process of delivering housing can lead to more sustainable housing practices and how the exchange of international housing concepts may contribute to the implementation of these modifications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.082 | 0.005 |
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".