Bibliographic record
Abstract
This project brings together Canadian and Vietnamese researchers and an NGO to examine the provision and use of formally-designed public spaces in Hanoi in relation to the use, needs, and aspirations of youths aged 18-25 years old. In this research, we have described the evolution of public spaces since the year 2000 (in terms of overall spatial distribution, available areas, quality, and usage) and explored some of the driving forces behind these changes. We have also analyzed how a variety of youth users (male, female, couples, groups) access, use, and relate to public parks and gardens in the Vietnamese capital city. The research relied on a mixed-method approach. This includes qualitative case studies of three parks respectively located in the inner city (Lenin Memorial Park), a new suburban area (the 34T Plaza of Trung Hoa Nhân Chinh) and the outer edge of the city (Hoa Binh Park). It also includes a geographic information system (GIS) mapping of geographic data about the evolution of the city’s parks, public gardens and bodies of water, and the quantitative analysis of survey data on public space’s accessibility and “publicness.”
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".