MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139352170 · doi:10.1177/0739456x11417830

Design Empowerment

2011· article· en· W2139352170 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Planning Education and Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Cities and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentInclusion (mineral)Public relationsPoliticsFace (sociological concept)Process (computing)Urban designSociologyPolitical scienceUrban planningComputer scienceEngineeringCivil engineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Empowering community residents to participate in neighborhood design may help overcome the tension between the urban densification requirements of climate change planning and the political infeasibility of rapid change. This research employed accessible visualization media in public workshops to test the capacity of the media to enable empowerment. In a community facing imminent development we found processes of mitigated empowerment through which residents accessed and generated information, were inspired to act in the face of complex problems, and expressed their ideas. The media did not enable design empowerment in the areas of community inclusion or integration into the design process.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.374
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