Lessons for Winnipeg from St. Louis’s Gateway Mall CONTRIBUTORS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cities across North America and around the world are increasingly investing in their public realm. Through cutting-edge planning and design processes, The City of St. Louis will soon see the transformation of the downtown Gateway Mall – the ribbon of ‘open green space ’ bisecting downtown St. Louis- into an ‘active civic space ’ that offers range of experiences for residents and visitors alike. As project lead, the design team comprising of Thomas Balsley & Associates and Urban Strategies Inc., was contracted by The City to develop a comprehensive master plan that would provide the City of St. Louis with the first comprehensive vision for transforming downtown’s central park into a “significant open active space that defines the heart and soul of St. Louis ” (Gateway Mall Master Plan, 2007). Building on this long-range vision, the plan creates an overall design framework, which will guide future individual proposals within the Mall, and establishes a road map for implementation and long-term management. The planning document produced is the result of comprehensive participatory planning processes with stakeholders including adjacent property owners as arranged by the Gateway Foundation Advisor. Further collaboration with other experts led to a comprehensive plan and specific developments requirements for the
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".