MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028067762 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v3n4p268

Building Failure and Collapse in Nigeria: the Influence of the Informal Sector

2010· article· en· W2028067762 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Olabosipo I. Fagbenle, Adedamola O Oluwunmi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFacilities and Workplace Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkmanshipIgnoranceEnforcementPrivate sectorGovernment (linguistics)Informal sectorBusinessPoliticsQuality (philosophy)Order (exchange)Economic growthEconomic policyFinancePolitical scienceOperations managementEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The occurrence of building failure and collapse has become a major issue of concern in the development of this nation as the magnitudes of this incident are becoming very alarming. This paper therefore examines the incidents of building failure/collapse in Nigeria. By focusing on six major states from each of the six geo-political regions of the country, the paper examined the contributory role of the informal sector to this decadence. The study indicated that the building failure and collapse stem principally from hasty construction, low quality workmanship, poor supervision, inexperience (use of incompetent hands), ignorance, evasion/ non-compliance with building regulations and non enforcement of building quality, standard and control on construction site/market. This study has revealed that more than 70% of the reported cases of building collapse in Nigeria stemmed from the informal sector. It further showed that 70-0%, 23-3% and 6.7% of the reported cases occurred in private, public and corporate organizations respectively. In this paper, it is concluded that it is important to educate or giver further advice to the government and the governmental agencies to be proactive to their duties in order to curb/reduce this negative image.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 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

Citations63
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicFacilities and Workplace ManagementFrench-language works237,207