MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2258684202 · doi:10.2495/sdp-v10-n3-281-300

The empirical role of social capital on urban transformation: a case study of istanbul

2015· article· en· W2258684202 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Özlem Özçevik, Pelin Tan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Capital and Networks
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial capitalTransformation (genetics)Empirical researchEnvironmental planningBusinessEconomic geographyRegional scienceGeographySociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to test the validity of the social capital knowledge that belongs to the local business community as an instrument for the formation of the initial strategies of urban transformation and to test the effect of independent variables in the formation of such social capital. This study takes as its point of departure the recently increasing interest in the role of social capital in planning and development, and the need for access to embedded knowledge in the sites of urban transformation. The lack of field data makes managing implementations of urban transformation difficult, and these implementations are not supported by appropriate policies. It is important to study this issue in stanbul, which is going through the process of urban transformation and harbors a variety of resources for social capital due to its unique conditions. The hypothesis of this study, which aims to contribute to research being conducted in the field, is that the levels of security, belonging, awareness, and expectations inherent in social capital can change according to the profile of the small business community and according to the characteristics of the physical capital in sites of urban transformation. In this study, conducted in 2012, data from the neighborhood of eliktepe were collected using 'mixed methods social research.'

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Qualitativelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Qualitativelow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicSocial Capital and NetworksFrench-language works237,207