Exploring temporary use possibilities for vacant urban land :A study of community-based planning practices in Christchurch, Vancouver, and Montréal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le but de ce travail dirigé est d’explorer l’efficacité d’utilisations temporaires en tant qu’outil afin d’utiliser des espaces vacants et sous-utilisés dans les villes. Trois villes mettant en place ce type de projet ont été étudiées : Vancouver (Canada), Montréal (Canada) and Christchurch (Nouvelle-Zélande). La valeur des terrains à Vancouver est élevée et la ville possède un domaine public de qualité. Montréal a des citoyens actifs et valorise la culture. Christchurch est en train de se faire littéralement reconstruire suite à un tremblement de terre. Les utilisations temporaires dans ces villes ne cadrent pas nécessairement dans la réglementation conventionnelle d’aménagement, mais elles peuvent permettre de rendre le éveloppement de la ville incrémental, et l’adapté aux actions et aux désirs des citoyens. Des questions spécifiques sur la différence entre les projets ayant une approche descendante (mené par l’État) et émergente (ascendante), ainsi que sur les actions possibles que peuvent prendre les urbanistes et organisations afin de passer outre ces barrières et encourager les utilisations temporaires positives tout en dissuadant les négatives ou non-constructives. (...)
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".