The Other Sensory Approach on Exploring Urban Heritage Landscape. Case Study: Chinese Quarter of Semarang
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new interpretation is needed to give meaning to conservation in the urban development framework and to support a sustainable cultural environment. Based on Québec Declaration (2008) and Burra Charter (2013), intangible dimensions became matter to give a richer and deeper meaning to the cultural heritage area. A shift has been seen in urban theories arguing for attention to the multi-sensory approach. This concept becomes matters as the raising critique towards the domination of visual perception in the built environment's design. The domination of audio-vision starting to reach out by the practitioners and scholars, unlike the other senses such as smell, tended to overlook and misconception. This paper outlines a pilot study's findings addressing holistic person-sensory experience in exploring the role of odor in shaping the cultural heritage area in Pecinan nowadays. It will discuss various scents detected, personal perception, and the link between odor and Pecinan 's character. All this data was collected using a smells walk, questionnaire survey, and interview. This research aims to explore the potential interface in preservation conflict between the character of existing historic town and change as smellscape is part of the intangible element and part of triangle components of a sense of place in supporting successful urban place.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".