Urban Heritage in Baghdad: Toward a Comprehensive Sustainable Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Architectural heritage is the most important legacy of civilisation and through it we can readily grasp the history of nations. Architects, urban planners and policymakers are now aware that historic cities require regulatory mechanisms if they are to maintain and enhance the fabric upon which their historicity and economic vitality is based. The historic areas in Baghdad, like those in Iraq, are suffering from declining infrastructure, a deteriorating environment, a lack of modern facilities, high unemployment rates, collapsing social impact and weakness in its urban institutions. Such pressures have brought into focus the extent to which sustainable development policies can contribute to the management of change in historic areas. A central objective of this investigation is to explore how the conservation-led regeneration of historic areas in Baghdad may be carried out in a way that promotes social, economic and environmental sustainability, and the full participation of all stakeholders. To achieve the research objective, the main theme, a hypothetical comprehensive model, and a plan and action plan are proposed. The conclusions reached demonstrate that to achieve the strategy of immediate sustainable conservation-led regeneration, the government should contribute to such conservation projects and support the formation of an institutional framework.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".