MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

(In)Visible factors affecting people in the spatial appropriation process of urban green spaces in Brazil

2023· article· en· W4388109993 on OpenAlexaff
Carla Fernanda Barbosa Teixeira, Robert Gifford

Bibliographic record

Venueurbe Revista Brasileira de Gestão Urbana · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAppropriationGeographyVulnerability (computing)Process (computing)Sustainable developmentMicroclimateSpace (punctuation)Environmental planningSociologyEnvironmental resource managementEcologyComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEpistemologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The importance of green areas in urban centers is related to the environmental quality and the sustainable development of these spaces, as well as the desirable interdisciplinary perspective. In addition to their ecological and microclimate functions, urban green spaces contribute to the establishment of a relationship between the environment and human beings, with the potential of stimulating development of sense of place. This study aims to present possible aspects involved in the process of spatial human appropriation in urban green spaces. Squares in Aracaju were the bases for observations of human behavior, which were related to spatial features. The results have revealed that, along with microclimate aspects, spatial composition, and vegetation (presence or absence), other aspects were related to the appropriation process of squares, such as decision-making based on prejudgment, exposure to risks, differentiated perceptions, and sense of vulnerability. Therefore, the qualitative, spatial, and cognitive pieces of information presented may contribute to improve the relationship between humans and environment and, consequently the appropriation of urban green spaces.

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)0.002
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 venueurbe Revista Brasileira de Gestão UrbanaSame topicUrban Green Space and HealthFrench-language works237,207