Campus Development And Downtown Regeneration – Perspectives For Katowice
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
Abstract The scope of the paper is to present the issues concerning the revitalization of an area situated in the centre of Katowice, where an academic quarter of the University of Silesia is emerging. Although this problem has been subject of numerous research works, workshops and competitions, the city of Katowice, despite many investments, has not managed to fully implement the revitalization of this area. Research activities indicated the deficiency in the integration of student functions. The surface of the area is about 10 hectares, located at the quarter comprising Warszawska, Bankowa and Dudy-Gracza Streets and the Rawa river boulevards. In May 2014 the Municipality of Katowice and University of Silesia announced the workshops on concepts of integrating an urban student centre, with the participation of the team from the Faculty of Architecture, Silesian University of Technology. The workshops were focused on analysing the situation of the program and design elaboration for the area in question. The proposed solutions were targeted at creating a student centre integrated with other public sites of Katowice, improving the attractiveness of the Rawa riverside, and providing a competitive advantage for the city of Katowice over other university cities in Poland.
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