MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1500207130

외국의 중심시가지활성화를 위한 BID(Business Improvement Districts)에 관한 연구

2010· article· ko· W1500207130 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
이삼수, 전재범

Bibliographic record

Venue한국지역개발학회지 · 2010
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPublic-Private Partnership Projects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDowntownVariety (cybernetics)BusinessGeneral partnershipQuality (philosophy)Consistency (knowledge bases)Local economic developmentEconomic growthFinanceEconomicsGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There have been continuous efforts to introduce policies and measures for revitalizing local businesses and industries which became obsolete physically and economically in downtown areas. Those strategies can play a significant role for leveraging local economic growth as well as improving environmental quality of the areas. In particular, the consistency of the residents’voluntary participation and the public support made it possible to achieve local economic development and cultural and community revitalization in downtown areas of developed countries. Among a variety of relevant endeavors, BID (Business Improvement District) is considered as one of the most important measures which has become popular in the U.S., the U.K., Germany and Canada. This study introduces and compares some BIDs and similar measures which have been implemented in the U.S., the U.K. and Japan. Then, it investigates major issues related to backgrounds, purposes and specific contents of the strategies when they are put into effect. The purpose of this research is to suggest some implications for introducing innovative urban policies and measures for regenerating depressed urban areas and stagnant downtown areas physically and economically. They can include grass-roots organization and self-sustaining financing strategies through the partnership among local residents, municipalities and central authorities.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.005

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue한국지역개발학회지Same topicPublic-Private Partnership ProjectsFrench-language works237,207