MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2566713700 · doi:10.5539/mas.v11n2p69

Architectural Green Spaces Design of Medical Centers with Passive Defense Approach

2016· article· en· W2566713700 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nasibeh Rezazadeh, Hassan Sattari Sarbangholi

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Computer scienceSpace (punctuation)Architectural engineeringPerspective (graphical)Order (exchange)Set (abstract data type)Architectural designEngineering managementBusinessComputer securityArtificial intelligenceGeographyEngineeringArchitecture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since medical centers, from the perspective of civil defense, are considered as centers of critical urban land, therefore, it is essential the criteria and defensive mechanisms to comply in design. One of these strategies would be taking advantage of the vegetation in a hospital. From this perspective, the use of vegetation in the hospital needs to scientific and expertise comments by the expert in the green space who is familiar with knowledge of passive defense. In this study, it is tried the principles of architectural green spaces design of medical centers to discuss from an architectural defensive approach and passive defense. For this purpose, using descriptive-analytic method and library research tool, the role of security in outer space of the medical centers are investigated, and in the end, a set of strategies for architectural design of green space for a therapeutic complex in order to reduce the vulnerability of human resources and improve security will be presented, by taking advantage of the fundamental concepts of passive defense. The present research achievements in the designing of green spaces for the medical centers will be useful in line with promoting passive defense purposes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicUrban Green Space and HealthFrench-language works237,207