MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Development of Intra-Quarter Territories of the Historical Center of St. Petersburg with Consideration of Consumer Activity of the Population

2018· article· en· W2892152043 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Леонид Лавров

Bibliographic record

VenueSCIENTIFIC JOURNAL “ACADEMIA ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION” · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrbanization and City Planning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)St petersburgUrbanizationUrban planningCenter (category theory)Investment (military)PopulationBusinessGeographyEconomic growthEngineeringRegional scienceCivil engineeringPolitical scienceEconomicsSociologyDemographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prospects for the development of the historical center of St Petersburg are considered. The specifics of its residential quarters housing are revealed, which occupies more than a thousand hectares and is based on the use of two contrasting morphotypes - exterior and intra-quarter. There is a tendency to use intra-quarter territories for public purposes. The difficulties encountered in the implementation of the variant in which the open courtyards were the key object are analyzed. A tendency for spontaneous privatization and the passive use of household plots are fixed, which results in their exclusion from the urbanization process. Passivity of administrative bodies is noted in the absence of effective financial and legal instruments for regulating urban development The concept of arrangement of intra-quarter passages (a variant of the popular St Petersburg courtyards) is proposed. Their system is designed to compensate for thelow density of the street network in the center of St Petersburg and improve the conditions of pedestrian communications. The basis for the implementation of such projects may be intra-quarter depressive sites. There is a possibility for accommodation of various objects of social infrastructure along the transport routes, designed for the conditions of passing services. It is proposed to take into account the successful experience of entrance courtyards usage on the territory of blocks and the development of roofs for excursions. It is assumed that this approach can attract private investment to rehabilitate depressed areas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score0.825

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSCIENTIFIC JOURNAL “ACADEMIA ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION”Same topicUrbanization and City PlanningFrench-language works237,207