MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974004674 · doi:10.2495/sdp-v1-n3-287-302

An integrated and shared approach to sea of the regional town master plan of Sicily

2006· article· en· W1974004674 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Giovanna Federico, Giovanni Lascari, Maria La Gennusa, Gianfranco Rizzo, Marzia Traverso

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityStrategic environmental assessmentDashboardPlan (archaeology)SicilianEnvironmental planningWork (physics)Action planEnvironmental resource managementMaster planProcess (computing)BusinessRanking (information retrieval)Land useRegional planningUrban planningEnvironmental impact assessmentComputer scienceGeographyPolitical scienceEngineeringCivil engineeringManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The work addresses one of the most important problems in contemporary environmental land planning.Already existing procedures, in fact, must now conform to the new requirements imposed by the recent national and international regulations and standards that call for a more conscious approach to the use of natural resources.Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), for example, takes into account, the different effects of a plan in various fields such as the environment, the economy and the development.This obviously calls for global analysis tools that could help administrators, stakeholders and technicians in the decision-making process of such complex systems.SEA of the Town Master Plan of the Sicilian region is here utilized for demonstrating the effectiveness of a continuously concerted action with the stakeholders in the decision-making processes involving wide and complex territories.For this purpose, the Dashboard of Sustainability is applied to the Sicilian Town Master Plan by comparing the performances of nine Sicilian provinces in terms of different policy scenarios, through a consideration of the effects on the environment, mobility, society and town planning issues.This consultation procedure results in a very effective tool for politically ranking, within a shared frame, different alternatives referring to land developing interventions.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicEnvironmental and Social Impact AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207