MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994225570 · doi:10.2495/sdp-v15-n1-1-13

on the determinants of a successful, sustainable-driven adaptive reuse: A multiple regression Approach

2020· article· en· W2994225570 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Despo S. Parpas, Andreas Savvides

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptive reuseReuseRegressionRegression analysisSustainabilitySustainable developmentEconometricsMultivariate adaptive regression splinesComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceStatisticsEngineeringMathematicsMachine learningPolynomial regressionCivil engineeringEcologyWaste managementBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to outline an ongoing research, examining the determinants of a successful, sustainable-driven development.The practice of adaptive reuse is connected with sustainable development and although it is widely believed that mainly economic factors drive possible development schemes, it is found through this research that, in the case of adaptive reuse, there are some other contributing criteria.The methodological tool implemented to obtain the results is multiple regression analysis and the contributions included in the model are based on the fields of socio-economics, culture and the environment.These vital contributions are key components of both the practice of adaptive reuse and sustainable-driven developments of the built environment.The advantage gained by applying statistical methods to examine multi-criteria cases is the possibility for well-justified observations; these are intended to be valuable tools for decision makers and involved stakeholders aiming to achieve successful sustainable adaptations.although the findings presented in this paper are derived from research data collected in cyprus, the methodological approach could be applied to a broader context, hence leading to more universal conclusions.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicCultural Heritage Management and PreservationFrench-language works237,207