Review of <i>The Calgary Project: Urban Form/Urban Life.\n</i> By Beverly A. Sandalack and Andrei Nicolai.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Calgary Project is an ambitious narrative. In eight chapters and two appendixes, the authors set about tracing the historical and spatial evolution of Calgary, aiming at drawing conclusions that could inform its planning in the future. The city's development is portrayed through five periods, unfolding from the establishment of a small North West Mounted Police Fort in 1875 to our times. Each period is featured in a chapter that opens with a discussion of the ideas, plans, and planning practices of the time, followed by a discussion of the "spatial structure" of the urbanized areas, and concludes with an illustrated analysis of characteristic urban and architectural forms. Drawing loosely on Kevin Lynch's cityscape analysis categories and more largely on M. R. G. Conzen's approach to townscape analysis, the authors explore the material manifestations and spatial logics that mark Calgary's different periods of growth.\nThe original and most compelling contribution of the work lies in its systematic documentation and representation in two and three dimensions of the built landscape at different levels of spatial resolution, from the city as a whole, to the evolving settlement configurations of the various suburbs, and down to the platting, architectural vocabulary and syntax, and the resulting streetscapes. Combined with a rich iconography, these representations trace a systematic repertory of Calgary's built landscapes (i.e., the city's morphology). They allow the reader to reflect on how the planning ideas, the purposeful development practices, and the inevitable social and economic forces and contingencies have combined to produce a contrasted cityscape, more complex, considering the city's young age, than the authors initially thought.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.025 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.010 |
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".