Impact of Location-Behavior on Sense of Belonging to Place
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sense of belonging is one of criteria of evaluating high quality environments and is addressed by environmental designers and it emphasizes on environment social activities and relations of physical component. A lot of activities and social interaction between individuals take place in a specific location over time and this brings about such expectation that those activities are specified to that space or location and over time the emerged behavior in that space induce sense of belonging and local identity for that space among those individuals. Sense of belonging to an environment arises from social interactions in the environment including information and social common signs. This research is conducted with the aim of examining location behaviors and its impact on local sense of belonging. It is examined the literature with cognitive research method and with approach of ontology and epistemology. in this paper with the aim of introduction and defining concepts such as location-behavior, identity and sense of belonging to place, based on review of relating documents and resources in this respect one examines the impact of location behavior in the Enqelab street and district of college bridge. Research results suggest that among effective parameters in sense of place, location behaviors and activity influence greatly on identity of urban spaces.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".