Urban revitalisation within the historical quarter: A comprehensive analysis of a medium sized city in Romania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The public space environment is one of the critical influential factors for strengthening local identity and communities’ sense of belonging, while enhancing city life quality. This study focuses on the use of heritage buildings as a catalyst for reactivating public spaces and aims to explore to what extent the revitalization project for the historical centre of Craiova, a medium-sized post-socialist city, has succeeded. The three dimensions of revitalisation – physical, economic and social – were analysed using a mixed approach, including participant observation, field investigation, and a residents’ survey. Physical changes within the study area, improved accessibility, functional changes and economic restructuring were analysed, as well residents’ perceptions and use of the area (perceived changes, use of the place, types of places used by the residents, frequency, times spent). The results point to the fact that not all the three dimensions of the revitalization project were equally successful, proving once again that not all the actions are effective in delivering the best outcomes. The main beneficiaries are discussed and the outcome of the revitalisation project is analysed against similar projects in other countries.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".