MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999676613 · doi:10.5539/enrr.v5n2p109

Green versus Gray: Attitudes toward Vegetation in a Tropical Metropolitan Square

2015· article· en· W1999676613 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Luis Santiago, Tatiana M. Gladkikh, Liz Betancourt, Yaheli Vargas

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Natural Resources Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreen infrastructureMetropolitan areaEcosystem servicesVisionCognitionIdentification (biology)GeographyEcosystemEnvironmental resource managementEcologyPsychologySociologyEnvironmental planningEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urban squares play an increasingly important role as spaces with green areas where residents can connect with nature and consume ecological amenities. Our research investigated user attitudes and preferences towards the presence, use and benefits of green infrastructure in Convalecencia Square, a main city square in San Juan, Puerto Rico with an unusual dual configuration and regulatory structure. Users were interviewed to assess preferences and attitudes towards vegetation and uses. A tripartite model that considered cognitive, affective and behavioral components was used to examine attitudes towards green areas, and choice experiment based methodology facilitated assessment of user preferences towards existing and hypothetical gray/green infrastructure configurations. Findings show that, with the exception of those expressing visions akin to those of the hygienic city imaginary, users show strong affective outlooks towards green infrastructure, placing emphasis on aesthetic components, and exhibiting a limited identification of cognitive components such as the role of ecosystem services. Education on green area ecosystem services could help bridge the gap between affective and cognitive components. Furthermore, gender differences on green infrastructure configuration choices point to the idea of exploring gender-differentiated green area conservation and development strategies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.883

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Natural Resources ResearchSame topicUrban Green Space and HealthFrench-language works237,207