MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W401591566

Fastighetsförvaltning, service och kontroll : En undersökning av kvartersvärdarnas funktion i olika områden

2007· article· sv· W401591566 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Caroline Hedlund

Bibliographic record

VenueKTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) · 2007
Typearticle
Languagesv
FieldPsychology
TopicFacilities and Workplace Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsService (business)Quarter (Canadian coin)HumanitiesPolitical scienceBusinessGeographyArtMarketing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2005 a public housing company in Uppsala, Sweden introduced the service quarter host. The focus on comfort (life quality in American programmes) is similar to the non-tolerance programmes. The idea of non-tolerance derived from the theory of Broken windows. The purpose is to examine how the service works according to the theories of Broken windows and social control. The aim is also to examine if the manifest and the latent functions are the same in different areas. Hosts from four different areas have been interviewed in a comparative case study. The result tells that the hosts practice according to the Broken windows model when they prevent damage to, or around the buildings by checking them. And to the non-tolerance when they are taking care of minor problems, defined by them. The manifest functions of the service are the same in all four areas. The latent functions are different related to the host’s apprehension of the people in the areas. How the manifest services are carried out influences the latent function. Social control cannot be excluded as a latent function. The resemblances with the more social administration in Gothenburg points out public housing in the direction of being social housing.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.702
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.266 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology)Same topicFacilities and Workplace ManagementFrench-language works237,207