MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924609815 · doi:10.22215/timreview/1224

Urban Living Labs: Towards an Integrated Understanding of their Key Components

2019· article· en· W2924609815 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Diana Chronéer, Anna Ståhlbröst, Abdolrasoul Habibipour

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology Innovation Management Review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLuleå Tekniska UniversitetEuropean Commission
KeywordsKey (lock)Urban planningEnvironmental planningBusinessGeographyComputer scienceCivil engineeringEngineeringComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IntroductionNowadays, cities are facing increasing urban complexity and grand societal challenges. Hence, there is a growing trend to make urban areas more adaptable to the needs of their citizens by preventing social problems as well as viewing the cities as a vehicle for innovation in urban planning processes (Juujärvi & Pesso, 2013; Scholl & Kemp, 2016).

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0130.014
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.005

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations99
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology Innovation Management ReviewSame topicInnovative Approaches in Technology and Social DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207