Postindustrial Landscape Redevelopment: a ddressing the past, envisioning the future
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Investigators of site design and planning projects are shifting their scholarly emphasis from the design of single case study projects and isolated objects towards focusing upon meta-studies by examining the design of larger urban surfaces and the results from many projects, thus increasing the understanding concerning the impact of such interventions. This meta-studies process facilitates building landscape architecture theory, providing a widely accepted theoretical framework based on specific design principles and norms from which might influence and guide practical development. The analysis of postindustrial land transformation case studies considering both design principles and strategies used in redevelopment, constitutes a relevant framework towards the definition of new design and planning normative theories. For this reason, this research, was based on the examination of 346 case studies across the globe, and a closer examination of six postindustrial case studies (Duisburg, Germany; Lisbon, Portugal; Amsterdam, Netherlands; Cleveland, Ohio, USA; Toronto, Canada; and Chicago, Illinois, USA), in order to build a normative theory based on a set of planning and design principles that might inform future post-industrial land transformation practice. Our study reveals 37 design and planning principles applied across the six case studies. Keywords—case study, design principles, normative theory, postindustrial landscape.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.007 | 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 teacher head, 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".