THE CHARACTERISTIC OF THE REFERENCES OF UNIVERSITY CAMPUS MASTER PLANS IN THE U.S., CANADA AND AUSTRALIA : A study on university campus master plan Part 2
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study is performed to clarify kinds, contents, expression elements of references of campus master plans. The campus master plans studied were from 42 universities in the U.S., Canada and Australia. The results were as follows; 1) References include drawings, photographs, sketches and tables.The contents of the references are historical documents, articles, geographic data, regional data, existing setting, analysis, concept, plan and details. The expression range of CMP are large regions, an university, an area, unit space, architecuture and the others. 2) References are used appropriately in accordance with the purposes. 3) Expression elements of references can be classified into 10 categories and 31 elements. 4) About 40% of the drawings display the periphery area of the campus.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it