MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309076324 · doi:10.1080/13549839.2022.2145602

Exploring perspectives on sustainability and planning from national and local planners for effective practice: the experience of Ghana

2022· article· en· W4309076324 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLocal Environment · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersWashington University in St. Louis
KeywordsSustainabilitySettlement (finance)Local planningEnvironmental planningTask (project management)Urban planningBusinessPolitical scienceEconomic growthManagementEngineeringGeographyEconomicsCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding how the planning system is (not) functioning remains a challenge for many urban planners in the developing world. This paper responds by conducting an analysis of the discourse between national and local planners. It seeks to unfold the challenges of informal settlement planning in Accra, Ghana. Through in-depth interviews, this paper suggests that: (I) Grounding sustainability must be conducted by implementing the plans rather than producing the plans. (II) Empowering local planners should be a primary task to incrementally remedy the challenging planning system in countries like Ghana.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.254 · 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