Defining indicators for evaluating the residential environment in historic districts based on human needs: focusing on two cases in Northern China
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Compared to traditional communities, the residential environment in historic districts (HDs) is generally poor. Tourism development within HDs has affected these environments. As tailored assessment indicators are absent in HDs, this study introduces the historic district residential environment assessment indicator (HD-REAI) – a framework designed for the urban setting of HDs. The HD-REAI integrates Maslow’s theory and addresses the challenges and attributes of HDs. HD-REAI focuses on factors like housing property rights and district culture, which are pivotal for HDs. This enables a more nuanced and relevant evaluation of the residential environment in these areas. This study details the development of the HD-REAI and validates its efficacy through its application in two Northern Chinese HDs. The results demonstrate that the HD-REAI effectively assesses the environment, offering a specialized and context-sensitive tool. Moreover, different socioeconomic attributes have different effects on the assessment results. This study could provide a basis for constructing more refined and context-specific assessment tools to enhance residential environments in HDs
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it