MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386484164 · doi:10.3390/ijerph20186720

Sustainable Smart Cities—Social Media Platforms and Their Role in Community Neighborhood Resilience—A Systematic Review

2023· review· en· W4386484164 on OpenAlexaff
Soumya Balakrishnan, Suzanne Elayan, Martin Sýkora, Marin Solter, Rob Feick, Christopher Macdonald Hewitt, Yi Qiao Liu, Ketan Shankardass

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Cities and Technologies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaResilience (materials science)Community resilienceVariety (cybernetics)PreparednessSmart cityPandemicGuard (computer science)Psychological resilienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)SociologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceInternet privacyComputer sciencePsychologyInternet of ThingsSocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic took most communities off guard and has highlighted gaps in community preparedness and resilience in spite of the numerous technological advancements and the variety of available social media platforms that many relied on during lockdown periods. This served to emphasise the necessity for exploring the roles of social media and smart city technologies in mitigating pandemic impacts. In this systematic literature review, we examined twelve articles on social media usage and smart city technologies and their contributions to community resilience during COVID-19. The analysis focused on the use of social media platforms and smart city technologies during and after lockdown periods, examining their role in fostering community resilience. Results indicate that social media and smart city technologies were instrumental in helping communities adapt and recover from the pandemic. While past studies have examined community resilience, social media, or smart cities separately, there is limited literature collating insights on the three elements combined. We therefore argue that these technologies, employed collaboratively, enhance community resilience during crises. Nevertheless, further research is recommended, particularly on urban resilience and comparative analyses to deepen our understanding of the complex interplay between these variables.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0100.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicSmart Cities and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207