MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of specific urban parameters to boost sustainable smart cities – a case study in Belo Horizonte

2024· article· en· W4401573022 on OpenAlexaff
Isaias Carlos de Azevedo Júnior, Raquel Diniz Oliveira, Flávia Spitale Jacques Poggiali

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Cities and Technologies
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeoreferenceSustainable developmentStructuringEnvironmental planningSmart cityTransport engineeringUrban planningComputer scienceBusinessEnvironmental economicsGeographyCivil engineeringInternet of ThingsEngineeringComputer securityPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The analysis and understanding of data related to urban processes are indispensable for the efficient management of cities. In the present study, various parameters and indicators were analyzed to determine which would be most relevant for public policies in Belo Horizonte. Data from public databases were organized on a georeferenced platform (WebGIS) and in electronic spreadsheets, allowing for the treatment and correlation of parameters with urban indicators. As a result, the parameters concerning the size, age, and use of buildings, as well as urban infrastructure and hydrogeological risks, were those that showed the highest number of strong correlations with the analyzed indicators. The study of these parameters, as well as the adopted methodology, have the potential to contribute to the development of action plans focused on the structuring and advancement of smart and sustainable cities.

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 score0.235
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Cities and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207