REGENERATING THE RIVER OF LIFE OF THE CITY - IMPROVING THE PEDESTRIANSâ EXPERIENCE ON URBAN STREETS IN TORONTO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urban streets should be functional as both “path” and “place”, but “street as place” has been\noverlooked in urban design. The purpose of this thesis is to develop design guidelines for\nimproving pedestrians’ experience on urban streets in Toronto. The study site is Gould Street\nin downtown Toronto. A preliminary study revealed thermal comfort, safety, social\ninteraction and visual experience as key factors influencing pedestrians’ experience on urban\nstreets. Design guidelines were formulated from literature review to address these key factors\non Gould Street. These factors also form the framework for site inventories and analyses. The\ndesign concept, “Regenerating the river of life of the city”, is implemented by applying the\nguidelines to three design solutions. These alternatives were compared to identify their\nstrengths and weaknesses related to the guidelines. Conclusions are drawn regarding the\napplicability of the guidelines, the limitations of the research and possibilities for future\nstudies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".