MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2559104014 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v9n6p225

Rethinking Slums: An Approach for Slums Development towards Sustainability

2016· article· en· W2559104014 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ghada Mohammad Elrayies

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlumDeveloping countrySustainabilityContext (archaeology)BusinessEconomic growthPovertySustainable developmentUrbanizationNatural resourceEnvironmental planningPopulationPolitical scienceEconomicsSociologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Slums have become an unavoidable reality in many countries of the world, particularly the developing world. Although there are various slums upgrading models and approaches to address the urban poverty in developing countries, the number of slum dwellers has actually grown and the problem is expected to become worse. Other public policies have to eradicate slums and didn't take into account the resources and the potentials that slums offer. This refers to the need to change the procedures followed in the development processes. Along with the human-related problems associated with slums, slums cause serious impacts on the environment and natural resources. In this context, sustainable development is the main outlet to achieve a real boom of the developing world that consequently confirms the need to develop slums in an integrated manner. So, this paper adopts a concept of investing the positive aspects of the slums' community in conjunction with developing a thorough framework based on the three pillars of sustainability, economy, society, and environment. From this vein, the research is guided by a set of successful practices of many of developing countries through an approach grounded on the three pillars of sustainability. The objectives of this paper are; 1) shedding light on the positive human power of slum dwellers, 2) disseminating best practices on sustainable approaches, from which it can be developed and adapted to fit in the context of the urban slums of developing countries, and 3) providing a comprehensive framework for developing sustainable slums.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.022
Scholarly communication0.0130.012
Open science0.0030.020
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations26
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicUrban and Rural Development ChallengesFrench-language works237,207