MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386255986 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.180805

Main Building as a Central Courtyard Pattern in Lasem, Central Java, Indonesia

2023· article· en· W4386255986 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mutiawati Mandaka, T. Yoyok Wahyu Subroto, Wiendu Nuryanti, Dyah Titisari Widyastuti

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitectural and Urban Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitas Gadjah Mada
KeywordsJavaCentral asiaGeographyComputer scienceOperating systemPhysical geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lasem, a city of a thousand gates often referred to as "Petit Chinois" by foreign tourists, possesses extraordinary historical heritage as the former capital, making it a Heritage City.This is one of the reasons for choosing Lasem as a research study location.This article contributes by identifying typical spatial patterns in Lasem.In this study, the focus of observation is Chinese settlements located in Babagan Village, Soditan Village, Karangturi Village, and Gedongmulyo Village, where these areas are the locations for the development of Chinese settlements in Lasem.This paper aims to understand the development of the typology of Chinese residential courtyards in Lasem and their survival to the present day, so that they can become part of the national cultural heritage.The research method used is descriptive qualitative, involving literature studies, field surveys, and analysis using graph access.The results found that the typology of the morphological floor plans of the Chinese settlement houses in Lasem differs in accessgraphy from their country of origin.Courtyards, which serve as building shafts in their home country, are not found in the houses of the Lasem Chinese settlements.The courtyards in the Chinese settlements of Lasem are precisely positioned around the main building.The uniqueness of the typology of the Chinese settlement courtyards in Lasem is the result of the space occupied by humans to survive and the community's attachment to their place of residence.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicArchitectural and Urban StudiesFrench-language works237,207