Emergent Ambient Culture in Smart Cities: Exploring the Internet of Cultural Things (IoCT) and Applications in 21st Century Urban Spaces
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
This work explores the Internet of Cultural Things (IoCT) and applications in the context of smart cities and learning cities. Ambient culture is advanced as an emergent form of the IoCT and applications in the context of 21 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">st</sup> century everyday interactions in urban spaces. The constructs of awareness, learning, openness, and engagement enable formulation and operationalization of a framework for ambient culture in support of this study of the Internet of Cultural Things (IoCT) and applications in smart cities. A case study approach is used in the gathering of qualitative and quantitative data through interviews and surveys conducted with diverse individuals across several cities in Canada and Europe. In parallel with this study, anecdotal evidence is gathered from individuals and groups about smart cities, enabling further analysis and triangulation of data. This work contributes to the research literature across several domains including the IoCT and applications in relation to smart cities and learning cities. Future research and practice directions are identified for ambient culture with implications for ambient heritage, libraries, data relationships, and data infrastructures going forward.
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