MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238939044 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14643999

The role of adaptive reuse in building resilience urban communities : a case-based review of praxis in Toronto, Ontario

2021· review· en· W4238939044 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katherine Faria

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptive reuseReuseSustainabilityIncentiveEnvironmental planningPraxisAdaptive managementEmpowermentEquity (law)BusinessProcess (computing)Environmental resource managementEngineeringPolitical scienceArchitectural engineeringGeographyEconomic growthEconomicsComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Support for adaptive reuse as an urban sustainability strategy has been strengthened in response to recent discussions concerning resource management, environmental protection, and urban revitalization. Studies conducted throughout Europe, North America and Australasia have demonstrated the advantages and procedural barriers of successful adaptive reuse. This study explores the praxis of adaptive reuse in Toronto, Canada, through an analysis of three project case studies: the Distillery Historic District, the Don Valley Brick works, and Wychwood Barns. In addition to a review of site history and function, this study assesses the roles of stakeholders, the diversity and distribution of benefits, project inclusivity, and community impact. This research confirms the role of adaptive reuse in achieving cost savings, ecological preservation, heritage conservation, equity and empowerment, while noted barriers include complexities, funding uncertainty, and design and safety concerns. Finally, options for public incentive programs are included as a strategy for streamlining the reuse process.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCultural Heritage Management and PreservationFrench-language works237,207