Is There an Integrated Society in Urban Neighbourhoods of Klang Vallley
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One remarkable point about Malaysia is that it is a multi-ethnic country with Malays being the most dominant race, followed closely by the Chinese and the Indians which can be regarded as the minority group. This paper attempts to address the issues of social integration among these multi-ethnic groups in neighbourhoods of Klang Valley. Social integration can be best understood by the ability of a society that is composed by people of different classes, ethnicity and educational background to resolve conflicts that may occur between them. The levels of integration can be measured by levels of tolerance and interaction among the individuals regardless of their differences that may come in many forms: skin colours, languages, beliefs, cultures, values, class and so on. Thus, the question lies in whether it is possible to have an integrated society when the differences exist. Using the quantitative and qualitative approach, the research examines the way people from different ethnicity perceive their neighbourhoods. It also focuses on the levels of interactions among the multi-ethnic groups and seeks the underlying issues that may prohibit or hinder towards social integration.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".