MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884985996 · doi:10.11575/prism/32375

Transit-Oriented Development Tool Box for Implementation of the Calgary Metropolitan Plan's Compact Settlement Land Use and Development Policies

2015· article· en· W2884985996 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
O Planning Design

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRural development and sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaPlan (archaeology)Land useTransit-oriented developmentDevelopment planEnvironmental planningSettlement (finance)Master planLand developmentBusinessRegional scienceTransport engineeringEconomic growthGeographyEngineeringCivil engineeringFinanceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As part of the mission to build regional capacity and support the achievement of these goals, the CRP is working to develop a series of toolboxes to aid regional stakeholders in efforts in sustainable greenfield development, transit-oriented development, and intensification. This project represents the second toolbox in this series, which will present relevant information to CRP members about how to accommodate transit-oriented development (TOD) within their own communities. To this end, the TOD toolbox will present information to participating municipalities and stakeholders that can be used to support new transit-oriented development in the Calgary area. The objective of this will be to present practical examples of TOD strategies that have been applied in other locations, and to provide two pilot concepts that represent how these strategies could be used in the Calgary region.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0990.009

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)Same topicRural development and sustainabilityFrench-language works237,207