Research on the Development Plan and the Method of Heritage Preservation and Utilisation in Asuka Village
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Asuka Village, known as “the beginning of the Japanese state,” started its protection in 1996. Asuka Village has begun its unique system of protection: the “Asuka Village Traditional Scenic Beauty Preservation Plan” to provide the regulations and the “Asuka Village Development Plan” to guide the preservation and utilisation of historical resources and village development. In the 40 years since the preservation of Asuka Village began, the village has continued this planning system. This study summarises the preservation and utilisation of the historical resources of Asuka Village. By analysing the changes in the “Asuka Village Development Plan,” the trend of preservation and utilisation in Asuka Village is clarified. By studying three cases of heritage improvement at different times, this study clarifies the changes in the heritage improvement methods and concerns in the heritage preservation and utilisation process in Asuka Village. It elucidates the relationship between the Asuka Village Development Plan and heritage improvement. From a planning perspective, this research aims to provide some suggestions for preserving the ancient village and improving Asuka Village for future generations.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".