MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Place-Making and Sustainable Community Development

2019· book-chapter· en· W2947987422 on OpenAlex
Rosario Adapon Turvey

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePractice, progress, and proficiency in sustainability · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPlace Attachment and Urban Studies
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProsperitySustainabilitySustainable developmentSustainable communityPlace makingUrban planningEnvironmental planningSociologyEnvironmental ethicsPolitical scienceEconomic growthGeographyEngineeringEcologyArchitectural engineeringEconomicsCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review chapter explores place-making in terms of how it is linked with sustainable community development (SCD). Place-making as it relates to sustainable community development has not been understood in the practice of sustainability, urban planning, and community development. Here, place-making is a process of planning, designing, managing, and programming spaces to create patterns and activities in cultural, social, economic, and ecological terms to achieve a better quality of life, a prosperous economy, and healthy environment. As informed by research, it can be an approach to sustainability thinking as a strategy for transforming cities and public spaces to promote well-being and prosperity in a local place, urban area, or neighborhood. In the long-term, the theory and practice of sustainable community development relative to place-making will evolve and eventually produce well-grounded meanings and conceptualizations as we engage in more research on sustainability and sustainable development.

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.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.328 · 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