The Neighborhood-School Characteristics: As an Effective Factor of Social Sustainability in Neighborhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The neighborhood unit promotes quality of life, community feeling, and well-being by providing facilities. Sharing the main facilities of the neighborhood with all residents can play an important role in the satisfaction of the neighborhood. When a school (as one of the facilities) is placed into the neighborhood context, it can affect environmental and social issues. Therefore, the neighborhood facilities and services would not purely increase all residents’ satisfaction, well-being and quality of neighborhood through its equal accessibility for all residents. This paper discusses how the quality of the neighborhood can be enhanced and promoted by the different characteristics of facilities like schools.The research method is based on an analysis of the affective features of a primary school on social sustainability in the neighborhood. The research has been done by recording sample participants’ ideas. The questionnaires were administered to 285 participants from two neighborhoods (with neighborhood-school and non-neighborhood-school) in Kerman, Iran. Results confirm that important features of the neighborhood -school have a direct affect on the quality of the neighborhood. The comfort, safety and harmony were identified as the most important of the six presented factors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".