MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Resiliência urbana: aspectos relacionados ao comportamento humano em espaços verdes públicos

2023· article· pt· W4383427295 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carla Fernanda Barbosa Teixeira, Robert Gifford

Bibliographic record

VenueCadernos de Pós Graduação em Arquitetura e Urbanismo · 2023
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Arborization and Environmental Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAppropriationPsychological resilienceSociologyResilience (materials science)Order (exchange)PhenomenonArchitectureAction (physics)GeographyEpistemologySocial psychologyPsychologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of public green spaces in urban centers is essential for numerous urban activities, as well as, it is an alternative to mitigate the consequences of the phenomenon of climate change. However, many cities have public green spaces that are degraded, unsecurity and they are often pressured to be removed from the urban structure, as if they were the cause of presented problems. In order, we discuss the importance of green spaces in the urban structure briefly, in addition about the aspects are involved in the human appropriation of these spaces. This text is the result of the post-doctoral internship in psychology in Victoria, Canada and of academic research in bioclimatic architecture, presenting data from Aracaju’ squares (SE), Brazil. Examples are given to elucidate the ideas and discussion are presented. It is concluded that in order to use public green spaces as an action of urban resilience, it is necessary to offer a redefinition of these spaces by human being, changing your perception and your behavior.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCadernos de Pós Graduação em Arquitetura e UrbanismoSame topicUrban Arborization and Environmental StudiesFrench-language works237,207