MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2973119510

Health semiosphere in parks: case study in Quito and Madrid

2019· article· en· W2973119510 on OpenAlexaff
Mónica Santillán Trujillo, Miguel Ángel Rodríguez Arriero, Víctor Villavicencio Álvarez, Víctor Abril Porras, Tomás Cordero Espinoza

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCulinary Culture and Tourism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The parks importance as green environments for healthy recreation is not assumed in their real dimension given their health benefits, although the World Health Organization recommends the availability of a minimum of 9 m2 of green space per person. Various international organizations recognize that the park's main essential services for communities are economic value, health and environmental benefits. Objective: To determine the health semiosphere in emblematic parks of Quito and Madrid. Methods: A mixed investigation was carried out using semiotics as the main tool. For the information gathering, the citizen survey technique of Quito and Madrid was applied, as a basis for a comparative analysis that allowed measuring the perception modes. Results: Intrinsic health activities were determined as part of the park's semiosphere, both in Quito and Madrid. In the first city, recreation was recognized as the main one, and sports in the second city; as well as cultural and recreational activities such as the relevant ones to be enhanced. Conclusions: The park's main activities are intrinsically linked to citizen's health, so their semiosphere is based on their determination with the aim of repowering them.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicCulinary Culture and Tourism→French-language works237,207→