MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169413803 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v4n1p284

The Potential of GIS Tools in Strategic Urban Planning Process; as an Approach for Sustainable Development in Egypt

2011· article· en· W2169413803 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ayman Mohamed Nour

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrbanizationUrban planningEnvironmental planningBusinessProcess (computing)GIS DayGeographic information systemSustainable developmentCorporate governanceEmpowermentGIS and public healthEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceGeographyEconomic growthPolitical scienceEngineeringCivil engineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the last 20 years, geographic information systems (GIS) have emerged from the scientific laboratories into the heart of conventional planning practice. During this period, planners have been aggressive adopters and adapters, and strong advocates for local governments deploying GIS. This is true at least in part because GIS provides spatial analysis and manipulation capabilities that align closely with the professional needs of urban and regional planners. GIS technology is currently converging with several other technologies to provide new levels of accessibility and functionality. As GIS use becomes more widespread, planners make up less of the market. The aim of this paper is to study the potential of GIS applications in supporting strategic urban planning process for effective urban governance in sustainable urban development projects in Egypt, and developing the capacity and the empowerment of local administration tools, decision-making and good control for urban areas. As well, to interface the complex problems of urbanization, unplanned and negative impacts on the facilities and services and the environment in general in the cities of developing countries.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicUrban and Rural Development ChallengesFrench-language works237,207