Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is focused on urban tissues in ancient quarter and old quarter of Hanoi from the viewpoint of typo-morphology. I suggest that the unique urban landscape of Old Hanoi has its origins in deep and narrow lot. The tectonic form and the characteristics of four urban tissues, composed of deep and narrow lots, can be summarized as followings. First, although the construction system and program were changed, deep and narrow lot maintains its influence on the morphology of urban tissue. The morphological homogeneity and dynamics of old Hanoi result from the continuance of lots and the fluctuation of buildings' forms. Second, on the deep and narrow lot, the keen competitions to face the street coexists with the tensions to the deep inside. Despite the morphological change of each lot, the liveliness are continued on the surface layer of buildings. Third, the formative process of deep and narrow lot can distinguish into two patterns. One is the deep and narrow lot that was made by extending to inside from the streets. The other is the deep and narrow lot that were divided into pertinent width after fixing an outline of a block. The former is of the traditional urban tissue, and the latter is of the modern urban tissue.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".