MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378836485 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.180512

Prediction of Formal Transformations in City Structure (Kufa as a Model) Based on the Cellular Automation Model and Markov Chains

2023· article· en· W4378836485 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zena Ayad Jabber Jiddy, Sara Mahmood Al-Jawari

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUrban Design and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Kufa
KeywordsMarkov chainAutomationMarkov modelComputer scienceReliability engineeringEngineeringMachine learningMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research utilizes data produced by the Local Urban Management Directorate in Najaf and the imagery data from the Landsat 9 satellite, after being processed by the GIS tool.The research follows a descriptive and analytical approach; we integrated the Markov chain analysis and the cellular automation approach to predict transformations in city structure as a result of changes in land utilization.The research also aims to identify approaches to detect post-classification transformations in order to determine changes in land utilization.To predict the future land utilization in the city of Kufa, and to evaluate data accuracy, we used the Kappa Indicator to determine the potential applicability of the probability matrix that resulted from the city's previous formal transformations.This was concluded after comparing the expected results with the data from the actual image.This study demonstrates the usefulness of cellular modelling and Markov's model in determining formal transformations in city structure.This paper contributes to identifying transformations and changes in urban structures because of the importance of this topic in the predictions of the future of cities to control and contain the negative trends of these transformations.The paper simulates spatial and temporal shifts by building a model that integrates mathematical and statistical analysis, and given the results of the Kappa index, the model's simulation capacity was excellent.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicUrban Design and Spatial AnalysisFrench-language works237,207