MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967483598 · doi:10.2478/v10089-010-0017-y

The Quality of Life of Suburbanities: A Case Study of the Gdańsk Agglomeration

2010· article· en· W1967483598 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Grzegorz Masik

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Geography Socio-economic series · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDimension (graph theory)Quality (philosophy)Economies of agglomerationMeaning (existential)Government (linguistics)Quality of life (healthcare)SociologyMarketingRegional scienceBusinessPsychologyEconomicsEconomic growthMathematicsEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Quality of Life of Suburbanities: A Case Study of the Gdańsk Agglomeration The article explains the meaning of the concept of ‘quality of life’, placing emphasis on its subjective dimension. As the concept is more and more discussed in the literature, the author intends to examine the satisfaction within public spaces for which local government is responsible. According to research made in Canada it is worth measuring not only satisfaction as such but also the importance of its constituent dynamics. Therefore, a survey made in the suburbs of the Gdańsk agglomeration asked respondents about their satisfaction with public transport, roads, environment, etc., including questions about the relative importance of such issues. The combination of satisfaction and importance provide the overall quality of life. At the end of the paper the author considers if there is a chance to improve the quality of life through a brief analysis of local governments expenditure.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Geography Socio-economic seriesSame topicPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionFrench-language works237,207