BLOCK PATTERN AND HOUSE TYPES OF BOKAAP, CAPE TOWN, SOUTH AFRICA : Study on the spatial formation of non-white quarters in Cape Town
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to discuss the spatial formation of Cape Town focusing on non-white quarters. We pick up the area called "Bokaap" next to the central district of Cape Town which was developed in the 18th century as a case study area. The ancestors of the inhabitants are those who were brought from Asia such as India, Indonesia, Malaysia and so on. The area was classified as one of colored area under the apartheid social system. How western town planning theories had been applied to Cape Town is one of the major concerns of the study. Segregation of residential areas is the main topic which is very clearly seen in South African cities. Bokaap preserves the original grid because it was segregated as old malay quarter. We firstly clarify the history of the area and discuss the spatial patterns of the street blocks and building types based on the field survey. Most of the inhabitants are still Muslim and we can see many mosques distributed in the area. But the houses are very different from those in Dutch colonial cities in Asia. This paper clarifies the block patterns and classifies the courtyard houses in the area into several types which is well designed fitted to block formation. It is a little bit ironical that Bokaap is designated as a conserved area of National Monuments.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".