MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3162163658 · doi:10.1080/13574809.2021.1917984

Keeping young families in the centre: a pathways approach to child-friendly urban design

2021· article· en· W3162163658 on OpenAlexafffund
Anahita Shadkam, Markus Moos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Urban Design · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEnvironmentally friendlyFamily-friendlyQuality (philosophy)Urban designEnvironmental planningProcess (computing)EngineeringCivil engineeringUrban planningGeographyComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper outlines the importance of pathway design in creating ‘child-friendly’ cities. There is concern that central parts of major cities have excluded households with children through the process of youthification. The importance of parks in creating child-friendly neighbourhoods is widely accepted, but the quality of the pathways connecting parks to residential areas has received less attention. This study develops a design assessment approach and compares the quality of pathways in youthified and family-oriented neighbourhoods in Portland, Oregon. A stronger focus on informal play opportunities along pathways and a systematic design assessment is recommended to advance child-friendly planning.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Urban DesignSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207