Analyzing Growth Patterns of Greater Kumasi Metropolitan Area Using GIS and Multiple Regression Techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, half of the world’s population lives in urban areas and the tempo of urbanization is expected to continue unabated during the 21st century, with most of the growth occurring in the developing world. The metropolitanization of African urban centres has brought in its wake several challenges, including uncontrolled physical development, inadequate and deteriorating infrastructure, and traffic congestion. To address the challenges, there is the need to understand the patterns of growth and structure of these urban centres. However, little work has been done in this regard. In this paper, we sought to model the patterns of growth of the Greater Kumasi Metropolitan Area (GKMA) in Ghana. Using GIS and multiple-regression techniques, we have demonstrated that the form and growth of GKMA follow discernible patterns that can be explained by the monocentric city model and the ribbon development pattern of spatial growth. There are non-linear, negative relationships between distance from Central Kumasi and distance from highways (as predictors) and the dependent variables population density and population growth. The findings indicate that Africa’s metropolitan areas follow discernible patterns that can be explained by existing models applied in other regions.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".