MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216191921

Analysis on the influences of underground space development on urban residential environment

2014· article· en· W3216191921 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yang Xiaobin, Zhilong Chen, Li-chang Su

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of chemical and pharmaceutical research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUnderground infrastructure and sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic shortageQuarter (Canadian coin)Urban environmentArchitectural engineeringEnvironmental planningSpace (punctuation)Natural resourceNatural (archaeology)Resource (disambiguation)Living spaceHazardBuilt environmentGeographyBusinessEnvironmental scienceCivil engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A residential quarter accommodates substances, life and even the resident's spirit, a place, in and ar ound, where people spend most of their life. It is also the epi tome of such urban phenomena as land shortage and i ts rising price as well as environmental deterioration. Therefore, how to balance efficient land utilization and bette r living condition is a significant question for urban resea rch. As a limited natural resource, underground spa ce, with its own advantages, can be used in a wide range of area s like transportation, commerce, hazard prevention and environmental protection, boosting the substantial development of cities. This thesis is to study the environment design of underground space within residential quar ters in respective terms of psychological environme nt, air environment, lighting environment as well as sonic environment, with a hope to offer some ideas and su ggestions on building a cozy underground space in the quarters.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of chemical and pharmaceutical researchSame topicUnderground infrastructure and sustainabilityFrench-language works237,207