Contribution of municipalities to the cities’ sustainable physiognomy. recording local’s opinions and perceptions. The case of kallithea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present paper investigates the input of a Local Administration Organisation (LAO) of the urban Municipality of Kallithea to its sustainable physiognomy.The investigation takes place in a period when global and, in particular, European interest for the protection and the elevation of the physiognomy of cities is particularly intense.Through the phenomenon of globalisation and international uniformity, cities today are characterised by the absence of identity and local particularity.The protection and elevation of the physiognomy of a city does not only concern the aesthetic fi eld, but the total perception that a resident or visitor creates.This may be achieved through the combination of actions and more generally on a multi-level basis, so much in sectors such as city planning, circulation, energy, social and fi nancial structures in the city, as with interventions on the culture and the protection of the environment.When people mention the environment, they are not speaking only of the natural environment, but also of the cultural, social and fi nancial environment; they are essentially speaking of sustainable development of cities. Local administration today can play a large correctional and protective role.It can be a determining factor in the creation of a sustainable urban environment, in the protection and elevation of the physiognomy of cities, as it is the institution that is closest to citizens.This can be put into effect with the embodiment of local environmental policies within fi nancial and social policies.At the same time, by training and motivating citizens towards the promotion of sustainable development, by projecting models of cooperation between state, private and social bodies, the municipality can direct the urban societies towards the protection of the physiognomy of their cities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".