MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133010098

New-build gentrification and the changing inner city vote in Toronto and Vancouver

2007· dissertation· W7133010098 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eerik Riivo Ilves

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2007
Typedissertation
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Planning and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensusGentrificationInner cityVotingRedevelopmentPoliticsCorporate governanceUrban politics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis examines the relationship between the recent redevelopment of inner city lands into condominiums and the geography of the vote in Canadian inner cities. Conclusions are based on empirical analysis of provincial and federal election results and census data in Toronto and Vancouver over the previous 25 years. This study differentiates the composition of the vote in areas of recent condominium construction from the rest of the inner city and provides multiple linear regression analyses of election results with census data to test what socio-demographic variables are most salient in predicting and explaining political party choice. It finds that voters in areas of new-build gentrification are voting disproportionately for parties of the political right and the regression models find some support for the hypothesis that condominium areas are spatial bases for a new 'entrepreneurial' urban habitus that is conducive to support for neoliberal governance and policy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicUrban Planning and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207