MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1767956441

주거, 문화, 오픈스페이스를 고려한 암스테르담 이스턴하버지역 수변개발 특성 연구

2010· article· ko· W1767956441 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
이금진

Bibliographic record

Venue大韓建築學會論文集 : Journal of the architectural institute of Korea : Planning & design / 計劃系 · 2010
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldEngineering
TopicMaritime Ports and Logistics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Plan (archaeology)Port (circuit theory)Urban planningEnvironmental planningGeographyArchitectural engineeringCivil engineeringEngineeringArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The opportunity provided for the design method and strategies for waterfront development through the experience of Eastern Harbour District Amsterdam is the purpose of this paper. The City of Amsterdam has long wanted to develop the area along the IJ and IJoever area into a lively urban area, waterfront cultural quarter, linking central station and the new residential areas on two other former dockland sites, Java-KNSM eiland and Borneo-Sporenburg. Moreover, IJburg was formed by reclaiming from the IJmeer with city extension plan. The gigantic warehouses are a reminder of the time when the area was still a functional port. Seven new eilands are still growing up for housing with waterfront advantage. This paper reviews an assessment of its success in housing, culture with waterfront open space and concludes with the establishment of planning for waterfront development; extraction of the factors contributing to waterfront development; rehabilitation of infrastructure through the cultural quarter as an urban emblem with housing and waterfront open space; implementation of urban regeneration for the creation of identity considering historical cultural assets.

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)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 venue大韓建築學會論文集 : Journal of the architectural institute of Korea : Planning & design / 計劃系Same topicMaritime Ports and LogisticsFrench-language works237,207