A Road that divided a city: Assessing the key factors that influences the decision to rebuild the Gardiner Expressway East in Toronto
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alors que la planification du transport s’était longtemps attardée sur la voiture, les urbanistes d’aujourd’hui repensent la priorité donnée à l’automobile dans les réseaux de transports urbains. Les autoroutes urbaines construites dans les années 50 et 60 nécessitent des réparations majeures, ce qui donne la chance aux villes de changer leur façon de faire en ce qui a trait au transport et développement urbain pour devenir plus efficace et durable.[...] Alors que la théorie en urbanisme s’est éloignée de la planification des transports centrée sur l’automobile, la décision de la Gardiner Expressway démontre qu’une grande partie de la société n’est pas de cet avis; l’inquiétude suscitée par le potentiel du changement en infrastructure d’augmenter les temps de déplacement et la congestion de la circulation, même légèrement, ne peut être sous-estimée. Plus généralement, ce résultat démontre l'importance de la politique dans les questions d’aménagement et remet en question la valeur accordée à l'expertise professionnelle des urbanistes dans les décisions de planification des transports.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".