Assessment of the Isolation and Integrity of Intraurban Districts (a Case Study of St. Petersburg)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract— The isolation and integrity of a territory are recognized by jurists as one of the criteria for determining the borders of municipalities. After analyzing geographical studies of the relationships between the morphology of the intraurban territory, territorial identity, and the potential for the development of local communities, the authors of the article concluded that these criteria are not yielded by the measurement methodology; as a result, studies are limited to demarcated areas with extreme morphological characteristics. The article proposes a methodology for assessing the isolation and integrity of intraurban districts. Considering pedestrian links as the basis of intraurban municipal connections, the authors developed a technique based on a pedestrian graph, which makes it possible to obtain more sensitive estimates compared to calculations of transport accessibility. The indices of the isolation and integrity of the territorial units of St. Petersburg—raiony and municipal okruga1, as well as the integral index summarizing them, are calculated. It is concluded that the isolation and integrity of an intraurban district have a weak negative relationship with each other and are established by urban policy. Island raiony and peripheral municipal okruga with large block buildings of the 1970s demonstrate the greatest compliance with the principles of isolation and integrity. The authors announce a study of the influence of the morphology of a territory on the level of development of local self-government based on the results presented in this article.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".