MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2252420233

SELECTION METHOD OF DESIGN PRIORITY FOR IMPROVING RURAL TEXTURES

2010· article· en· W2252420233 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tohid Hatami-Khanghahi

Bibliographic record

VenueRomanian Journal of Regional Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrading (engineering)Quarter (Canadian coin)Selection (genetic algorithm)Design methodsComputer scienceEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementBusinessOperations researchGeographyCivil engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceEnvironmental science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The majority of valuable textures are found in rural residences. Physical design is the important part of a valuable texture improvement project. Because of the governmental policies in Iran, physical planning of improvement project is limited in specified confinements. Employing a suitable method for selection of design priorities in primary stages of project causes the improvement in the most part of the existing values. Present research offered practical experience by Author at selection method of design priorities in the Iranian village of Zonouzagh. This method was employed to register the important points on the base maps for extraction of high grade locations of the village texture for design priorities. These maps often involve historical development phases, quarter's confinements, connection between quarter's centres and passageways grading. Correct selection of design priorities for improving rural texture assures project goals and organic continuity in case village and even adjacent villages to be achieved.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRomanian Journal of Regional Science→Same topicCultural Industries and Urban Development→French-language works237,207→