MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410162348 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.200426

Retrofitting Mechanisms of Valuable Heritage Buildings: Al-Kifl Shrine as a Case Study

2025· article· en· W4410162348 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kadhim Faris Dhumad

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetrofittingArchitectural engineeringCultural heritageIndustrial heritageWorld heritageEnvironmental planningCivil engineeringEngineeringGeographyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceArchaeologyCultural heritage managementTourism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historic buildings that represent the cultural heritage of countries face many problems due to natural and unnatural deterioration factors, and their conservation requires multi-level interventions.Scientific and technological progress has enhanced the sustainability of these buildings by providing modern techniques and materials used in all stages of conservation, starting from documentation and architectural survey, determining the causes of damage, and ending with choosing the appropriate technique and material for implementation by international conservation principles.The research problem is the lack of local studies that address retrofitting mechanisms and the role of modern techniques in preserving historical buildings in Iraq.The research aims to identify appropriate techniques, considering specialized technical conditions such as safety, structural compatibility and efficiency to preserve buildings from deterioration.The research focuses on studying the shrine of Al-Kifl in Babylon Governorate as a model.The study introduces the application of a proposed retrofitting mechanisms using modern materials and techniques to strengthen and support the shrine within the comprehensive conservation processes.The study concluded that the mechanisms of retrofitting to preserve heritage buildings used in the study are effective, do not damage details, preserve the authenticity of the building, and predict future damage.

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 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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.418
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicArchaeology and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207