MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405800241 · doi:10.3390/mti9010001

Smart City Products and Their Materials Assessment Using the Pentagon Framework

2024· article· en· W4405800241 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMultimodal Technologies and Interaction · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Cities and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMassachusetts Institute of Technology
KeywordsPentagonComputer securityComputer sciencePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Smart cities are complex urban environments that rely on advanced technology and data analytics to enhance city services’ quality of life, sustainability, and efficiency. As these cities continue to evolve, there is a growing need for a structured framework to evaluate and integrate products that align with smart city objectives. This paper introduces the Pentagon Framework, a comprehensive evaluation method designed to ensure that products and their materials meet the specific needs of smart cities. The framework focuses on five key features—smart, sustainable, sensing, social, and safe—collectively called the Penta-S concept. These features provide a structured approach to categorizing and assessing products, ensuring alignment with the city’s goals for efficiency, sustainability, and user experience. The Smart City Pentagon Framework Analyzer is also presented, a dedicated web application that facilitates interaction with the framework. It allows product data input, provides feedback on alignment with the Penta-S features, and suggests personality traits based on the OCEAN model. Complementing the web application, the Smart City Penta-S Compliance Assistant API, developed through ChatGPT, offers a more profound, personalized evaluation of products, including the life cycle phase recommendations using the IPPMD model. This paper contributes to the development of smart city solutions by providing a flexible framework that can be applied to any product type, optimizing its life cycle, and ensuring compliance with the Pentagon Framework. This approach improves product integration and fosters user satisfaction by tailoring products and their materials to meet specific user preferences and needs within the smart city environment. The proposed framework emphasizes citizen-centric design and highlights its advantages over conventional evaluation methods, ultimately enhancing urban planning and smart city development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.580
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.255 · 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