Gobernabilidad metropolitana, democracia y eficiencia. Una comparación Barcelona-Montreall
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este artículo analiza la construcción de la legitimidad a escala metropolitana, entendida a partir de tresdimensiones: output-oriented (resultados de las políticas públicas), input-oriented (representación ciudadanay responsabilidad política) y throughput-oriented (procedimiento en la toma de decisiones). El debate sobrela eficiencia y la democracia metropolitanas ha sido conceptualizado por tres escuelas de pensamiento(reforma, public choice y nuevo regionalismo), examinadas en la primera parte. Estas corrientes proponenmodelos alternativos para gobernar las áreas metropolitanas y reforzar las múltiples vertientes de la legitimidad.Sin embargo, el debate sobre la legitimidad metropolitana se ha centrado en la dimensión de losresultados, marginando la vertiente democrática. La comparación entre Barcelona y Montreal realizada enla segunda parte permite explorar las razones del déficit democrático a escala metropolitana.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".