Protection of Privacy in Designing of Residential Complexes Architecture and Its Effect on Constructive Relations among the Residents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abode is the most important provider of civilization and house is the best protection of social culture of the society. Abode is the protector of the family dynasty and the relations among its members. Having suitable abode like other human needs is one of the primary rights of humans and it has been emphasized in constitutional law (article thirty one). Lack of abode and its unsuitable quality has direct and close relation with increasing of delinquency, divorce and social disruption and it is accounted as a deterrent factor in social, cultural and mental development and moderation. Also not having abode causes to create the social abnormal phenomena such as sleep street, hutment and slum that such life gives abnormal personality structure to the person. Lack of abode or its unsuitable quality is accounted an effective factor in creating phenomena like anxiety, depression and behavorial disorders and causes to decrease the mental and physical resistence of the person in facing with problems. Therefore planning for protection of privacy and residents independency despites the existence of healthy and constructive social interactions in residential complexes is an important thing. The purpose of this research is discussing about the importance of constructive privacy existence in residential complexes and the manner, quality and effective factors in formation of it. In order to promote the research, descriptive-analytic methodology has been applied and the method of information collecting is in the kind of documentary study which is embarked to analyze the received information by using of qualitative contents analysis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".