MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Long-Term Changes in the Spatial Pattern of Quality of Life in Hungary Since the Beginning of the Twentieth Century

2025· article· en· W4416366529 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
János Pénzes, Zsolt Szilágyi

Bibliographic record

VenueHungarian Studies Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrbanization and City Planning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommon spatial patternRestructuringPeriod (music)Spatial ecologyCommunismIndex (typography)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Long-term analyses frequently generate major methodological challenges. In the current study, an international indicator has been used for the case of Hungary. The modified and adapted so-called historical settlement-level Human Development Index (hsHDI) provides the methodological frame for the study. HDI is based on three components: GDP/income, educational attainment, and life expectancy. Five periods were included in the analysis. Significant changes were detected during this more than one-century-long period in the locations of the most and least developed settlements. The spatial pattern of hsHDI indicates a better situation in Transdanubia, while extended backward areas fall along the current border area even before the 1920 Trianon Peace Treaty. The Communist era had a major impact on the spatial structure, and increased living-quality values were observed in the northern Hungarian territory due to the state-supported mining and heavy industries. During the last decades—most occurring after the change of regime in 1989—significant restructuring was detected in the backward and developed settlements. The spatial structure of quality of life demonstrated increasing concentrations of high values in the surroundings of Budapest and the largest towns; low values in southwestern and northeastern Hungary were also observed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHungarian Studies ReviewSame topicUrbanization and City PlanningFrench-language works237,207