MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391710946 · doi:10.2478/jses-2023-0007

Green and Smart Urban Development: A Comparative Studies Between Cities of Romania, Canada and Denmark

2023· article· en· W4391710946 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laura-Elena Ilinu, Maria Horoiu, Alin Cristian Maricuţ, Giani Grădinaru

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social and Economic Statistics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilitySustainable developmentGreen economyContext (archaeology)Per capitaEnvironmental planningGovernment (linguistics)GeographyUrbanizationChinaEconomic growthRegional scienceBusinessPolitical sciencePopulationEconomicsSociologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Due to the fact that the planet’s resources are limited and human exploitation has led to unprecedented environmental pollution, sustainability has become a concept of great importance in recent years, especially in the context of very rapid and large-scale urban development. The green city is a form of sustainable city focused mainly on the creation of green spaces, which helps, among other things, to reduce pollution, to combat climate change and to create a more favorable environment for people. Green infrastructure is the main element that characterizes this type of sustainable city, the dynamics of the use of the term in specialized studies showing an upward trend. Interest in the notion of green city has seen a major increase in the last 8 years, highlighting the need to create a more nature-friendly way of urban development. The country that stands out regarding its contribution in terms of studies carried out on the theme of green city is China, while Romania is one of the countries where this subject is very little researched. A cluster analysis of cities in Romania, Denmark and Canada provides a valuable perspective, namely that Romanian cities are the most polluted and have very few green spaces per capita, suggesting the existence of problems with government policies to transform the cities into ones that respect the environment more.

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 score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Social and Economic StatisticsSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207