MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7048667054

A Look at Access to Green Space in Toronto Using the 3-30-300 Rule for Greener Cities

2022· other· en· W7048667054 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCrystallography and Radiation Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidenceListing (finance)Neighbourhood (mathematics)Space (punctuation)Real estateEstateUrban green spaceElement (criminal law)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many studies have demonstrated the increased use and importance of urban nature and its benefits, especially as it relates to peoples’ health and wellbeing. The 3-30-300 rule was recently introduced by Dr. Cecil Konijnendijk as a guiding principle for urban forest programmes to ensure that all residents have access to trees and green space and their benefits. This rule states that every resident should be able to see at least 3 trees of a decent size from their home, every neighbourhood should have at least 30% canopy cover, and every resident should live within 300 metres from a high-quality park or green space. The status of this rule was evaluated in Toronto, the largest city in Canada, making use of real estate listings for entry-level homes. Of the 180 residences in the municipalities of Toronto (and Mississauga), only 12% met the 3-30-300 rule. When the residences were grouped by listing price, the top third of the most expensive residences had a higher proportion than the other two thirds of residences that met the entire rule and each element of the rule. The correlation between the listing price of a residence and all elements of the rule were statistically significant, indicating that the higher the listing price, the more accessible green space there was. This inequitable access leads to inequitable benefit of green space by residents and further exacerbates the inequity faced by marginalized communities. Given the low proportion of residences in Toronto (and Mississauga) examined for this project that meet the rule, it may not be a feasible goal to have all residences in these municipalities meet the rule as is. Consideration can be given to modifying the thresholds of the rule to ensure that a goal that is aspirational, yet still realistic, for these municipalities results in more green space for as many residents as possible in the long term. It is imperative to address inequalities in access and increase access to green space in urban centres so that all residents are able to experience the numerous benefits provided by urban nature.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.961

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0510.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it