Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims at providing the implications of success factors of sustainable regeneration cases by a case comparison study on Ewha Mural Town in Seoul and Chemainus Mural Town in Vancouver Island which is known as successful case of mural village. In the context of urban regeneration, cultural policy has entered into the age of glocalization and met with creative city discussions. In terms of cultural strategy and regional development, it has developed into ‘Creative Place-making’ and ‘Creative-based Strategies’. The authors conducted the ‘Creative-based Strategies’ and the discussion of ‘Creative Place-making’ for the comparative analysis of the two cases. The governance, territorial, and functional aspects for analysis framework were derived. For the sustainable mural village project, partnership and leadership in governance aspect, placeness and embeddedness in territorial aspect and economic/cultural life quality in functional aspect should be accompanied. It is obvious that the role of culture is becoming a necessity in the present age where many cities around the world are making a lot of efforts for city and regional development, and the mural village will function as a valid model serve as an effective model in the future. This study showed three success factors of the mural village regeneration project: Firstly, the strong leadership and partnership should be made between the public, the residents, and the participants. Second, both placeness and territorial de-embeddedness should be secured. Third, if the local economy can be revitalized through various culture-related industries, this urban regeneration project will become sustainable.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".