Criteria and Factors Affecting Sustainable Housing Design in Iran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the beginning of human life, housing problems are the most important matters of his life and with the expansion of urban life, importance in terms of the needs of mental, psychological and physical users has been doubled. The housing subject has been always interest to architects from various aspects and attempts made to improve affordable housing, attempts to improve relations or social housing, or seek to identify and develop the cultural origins, economics, management and other macro policies. On the other hand due to the growing population and consequently expand need to housing, and also identifying of residential needs of people in different dimensions necessity of this research is doubled. This study assuming more than half of the land in our cities is devoted to residential use and also lack of attention to sustainable development in the Residential Buildings the purpose of this study sustainable urban development and the achievement of sustainable affordable housin pattern.This study focuse on descriptive- analytical and based on library research seeks to answer this question: What are the criteria for designing sustainable housing in Iran? Thus, after the introduction, do analysis and commentary related content. Conclusion suggest that in addition to aspects of sustainability (economic, social and environmental), factors such as social, cultural and attention to the flexibility according to Iranian households, design sustainable housing should be considered.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".