MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096052873 · doi:10.5539/jgg.v4n2p1

Urban Form and Sustainable Development: The Case of Urmia City

2012· article· en· W2096052873 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Omid Mobaraki, Jamal Mohammadi, Zarabi Asghar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geography and Geology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture and Cultural Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrban sprawlSustainable developmentImpervious surfaceUrban planningSmart growthEnvironmental planningUrban ecosystemGeographyUrban densitySustainabilityEnvironmental qualityEnvironmental resource managementBusinessEcologyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The importance of urban form on sustainable development has been recognized in recent years. Since the late 20th century, a number of countries have adopted urban form policies in environmental planning. Urban form directly affects habitat, ecosystems, endangered species, and water quality through consumption, fragmentation, and or replacement of the natural cover with an impervious surface. The current research aims at identifying the urban model of Urmia City so to achieve a sustainable form. This study is applied and utilizes both descriptive and analytical methods. To measure the model of urban growth, Holdern, Shannon’s entropy, Moran and Geary’s coefficients were employed. The findings indicate that the model of urban growth is sprawl and this may leads to ecological, social and economical and urban form that is unsustainable. Regarding the consequences of sprawl growth and the movement toward achieving a sustainable development and sustainable urban form, it appears that the decentralized centralization method (changing one central city into multicentre one based on centralization and multiplication of activities in sub centers) with the emphasis on principles and strategies of urban smart growth is the best model for achieving sustainable form in the future.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations20
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geography and GeologySame topicArchitecture and Cultural InfluencesFrench-language works237,207