Our commitment to implement contents related to public space included in the New Urban Agenda adopted at the UN Habitat III conference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>On the 20<sup>th</sup> October 2016, at the United Nations Habitat III conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development, held in Quito, Ecuador, the New Urban Agenda (NUA) was adopted, providing a 20-year framework on how cities should be planned and managed to best promote sustainable urbanization globally. The document, as reported by Dr. Joan Clos, Secretary-General of the conference and Executive Director of the UN Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat), should be seen as an extension of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, agreed by 193 Member States of the United Nations in September 2015.<br />After the first conference in Vancouver (1976) and the second in Istanbul (1996), the third Habitat major summit to discuss the future of cities was attended by around 36.000 people from 167 different countries.<br />We officially launched The Journal of Public Space at the Habitat III Urban Library on the 19<sup>th </sup>October 2016, during a talk with our partners from UN Habitat Public Space Programme, Laura Petrella and Cecilia Andersson, and with our supporting partner at The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hendrik Tieben. The talk was very well received and was attended by more than 90 people. Interest in our new journal was high, many attendees have voiced the need of an independent, free and accessible platform to share ideas, researches, experiences and strategies to design, manage and appropriate public spaces.<br />Public space, as a topic of research, still fascinates and challenges several academics, but often bottom-up tactics by community groups are the most incredible example of how people are always passionate about their cities and their environment. What was evident in Quito, is how academia, industry and community groups would highly benefit in working together and discussing together about public spaces.</p>
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 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 | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".