Plans for development of the underground space of moscow ПЛАНИРОВАНИЕ ГРАДОСТРОИТЕЛЬНОГО ОСВОЕНИЯ ПОДЗЕМНОГО ПРОСТРАНСТВА г. МОСКВЫ
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cities tend to widely employ their underground space whenever selection of the model of compact spatial development is under discussion. There’s been growth in the complexity of approaches (“underground cities” of Canada and Japan), their planning, validity, consistency of implementation (master plans of underground areas of cities in Finland, the Netherlands, China, Singapore, etc.).Moscow still lags behind in terms of the scale and complexity of its “Urban Underground Space”, although the city has everything in place to transfer its engineering and transportation facilities, social, scientific and industrial infrastructure under the ground. Initial steps have already been made (The Concept for the Underground Space Development and Principal Trends for the Underground Development of Moscow, parts of the City Master Plan for the period up to 2025 provide for the planned goals in the underground development of each functional area).However, new political and economic realities require a systemic consideration of the problem and improvement of conceptual approaches, as the underground space is an integral part of the developed area. In this regard, substantial reform of the public administration in this area is necessary, first of all, in the field of spatial planning, as well as coordination of the underground planning with the adjacent sectors of the economic activity, adequate development of the system of legal, information and other types of support, urban regulation and engineering research, primarily on the federal level. Successful fundraising needs an adequate mechanism of assessment of the social and economic efficiency of development of the underground space of cities.Even if new territories are annexed to Moscow, the issue of underground development remains of vital importance. This is a rare opportunity to address the ambitious task of creating a unique comfortable environment for Muscovites to assure the sustainable development of the territory according to the Urban Planning Code of the Russian Federation. Therefore, any amendment into the Master Plan of the city needs a differentiated assessment of expediency of any underground construction project in each area under consideration, including the assessment of planning options and further selection of the most reasonable ones. Рассмотрена актуальная проблема градостроительного освоения подземного пространства крупнейших городов. На основе сравнительного анализа мирового опыта показано отставание г. Москвы в развитии подземной урбанистики, вскрыты системные причины этого. Для исправления ситуации предложена новая модель эффективного государственного управления развиваемыми территориями. В ее основе лежит функция комплексного планирования развития территории, включая ее подземную часть.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.004 |
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".