Hackathons for inclusive urban planning: Exploring divergence to co -create convergence
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
The VIVA-PLAN project (www.viva-plan.eu) aims to contribute to inclusive urban green planning through developing a new sustainable spatial planning framework for promoting biodiversity, social inclusion and human well-being. The project has a specific focus on marginalized groups such as young people and immigrants. <br> A key element in the VIVA-PLAN case-study approach is the use of two hackathons in each of the case-study areas Urbanplanen (Copenhagen) and Ronna (Södertälje). Traditionally, a hackathon is a multi-day event in which a diverse set of experts and stakeholders is brought together to develop initial solutions to complex problems. Within VIVA-PLAN, the hackathon approach is used to collaboratively find solutions for complex issues related to spatial urban planning at a local scale. The VIVA-PLAN hackathons are embedded within the wider VIVA-PLAN multi-methods approach, featuring a diverse array of social science methods to elucidate local practices related to urban green spaces, including ethnographic investigations, socio-ecological value mapping, interviews and focus-groups and ecological mapping. This document describes the VIVA-PLAN hackathon approach and how the two hackathons are implemented in each of the case-study areas.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it