Analysis of the Local Characteristics of Informal Settlements and how to Deal With these Settlements in the Neighborhood of Mashhad Abkuh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent decades that most of big cities around the country had faced with horizontal development, attachment of villages to cities was a common matter. Some of these villages, which mostly have been contradicted about their ownership and have deep social and historical roots, they haven’t adapted with new urban texture. These regions that being active and crowded villages in past and now have placed in main texture of cities; partially have returned to special samples of informal residence which have so many differences with common informal residence that often have been developed in outskirts of the towns. In totaling theoretical studies, development of these settlements had happened in cities (not in countryside), and that was because of lack of urban programming and management in studying and supply enough land to low income people. Some of most important features of most of these settlements are included as they developed simultaneously with making laws for urban designs, not presence of taking by force in them and the fact that some of their residents had been lived in formal urban texture. In this paper, the texture of Mashhad Abkuh has been studies as a case study, which was a village in outskirt of Mashhad city. The core fact of formation of this village probably returned to 1721. Presently, two connected villages, named as Saad Abad and Abkuh, have been formed an undivided settlement called as quarter of Abkuh castle with an organic texture, relatively worn-out and so much dense in geographical center of Mashhad city.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".