Urban Social Sustainability Trends in Research Literature
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the recent decade, scholars from different disciplines have discussed social sustainability within urban studies from both academic and policy perspectives. This paper aims to review the current literature and characterize definitions and trends related to social sustainability consideration of various urban units. The methodology used in this paper is desk research. Selection of the documents from different urban related disciplines - including urban planning, urban design, urban sociology and urban policy, limited to those published during 1993 to 2012. Social sustainability definitions portray either conditions of the concept or its principles and measurement framework. The review shows that different aspects in defining and reviewing social sustainability include social equity, satisfaction of human need, well-being, quality of life, social interaction, cohesion and inclusion, sense of community and sense of place. Reviewing studies conducted in different urban units, revealed that previous attempts on urban social sustainability emphasized more on community related issues. The majority of such researches examined the urban contexts of developed countries. This paper concluded that there has been little discussion on place related issues. Therefore, the urban social sustainability of urban places is the current understudied gap in the academic literature.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it