MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6981704666

Exploring Holistic Urban Sustainability from a Transformative Learning Perspective: The Southwood Precinct Project

2013· dissertation· en· W6981704666 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMineralogy and Gemology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecinctUrban sprawlSustainabilityOpposition (politics)Transformative learningSustainable developmentInterviewUrban planningOpenness to experience
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the increasing number of recommendations for urban sustainability, there remains a need for greater understanding of how communities become more sustainable given the predominant existing preference for sprawl and resistance towards urban alternatives. Focusing on the proposed development initiative for the Southwood Precinct in Winnipeg Manitoba, this research examined the reasons for opposition to, or concern with, existing recommendations for EcoCities, Healthy Cities, and Age-Friendly Cities. The study was conducted by interviewing local residents and stakeholders, using an image-based info-sheet as a communications tool to increase openness to alternative (more sustainable) urban development approaches. The study revealed that opposition and concern can stem from values that are more complex than mere preference for sprawl or resistance to change. Overall, participant reflections showed that the image-based info-sheet along with discussion (through semi-structured interviews) was conducive to expanding positive perceptions of sustainable development in local neighbourhoods.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicMineralogy and Gemology StudiesFrench-language works237,207