MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313640127 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.170834

Evaluate Ho Chi Minh City Sustainability Using Fuzzy Extent Analysis Method

2022· article· en· W4313640127 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hien Thi Thu Dinh, Quyen Le Hoang Thuy To Nguyen, Phong Thanh Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHo chi minhSustainabilitySustainable cityRanking (information retrieval)Sustainable developmentBusinessContext (archaeology)Environmental economicsEnvironmental planningAccommodationUrban planningEconomic growthSocioeconomicsGeographyPolitical scienceCivil engineeringEngineeringEconomicsComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sustainable development of cities was among the goals aimed by either country or region since the 1980s. Ho Chi Minh City was ranked as the most rapid urban development in Vietnam, which challenged the accommodation of the necessities for a pleasant life in a city with limited resources, including housing, public infrastructure, a clean environment, security, safety, employment, and other necessities. The purpose of this study was to measure city sustainability by employing fuzzy decision analysis. A systematic review of the literature has provided the theoretical framework for measuring sustainable cities. Further consent on the criteria of a sustainable city in the context of Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam was confirmed based on the evaluation of thirty experts with academic and practical experience in the field. The research findings provided the measurement model of city sustainability at three levels with three main criteria at 2nd level and twenty sub-criteria at 3rd level. The research results revealed that there is great consent for city performance and priority ranking in terms of the social dimension. However, great conflict in the importance and performance of economic and environmental dimensions has been found. This practically implied the strategies for bridging the gap between the city’s actual criteria performance and priority ranking in target city sustainability.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207