Living Conditions in the Historical Center of Palermo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims the analysis of the living conditions of a sample of household, residing at a quarter of Palermo’s historic city centre so that it is an effective instrument for politicians to improve the quality of life of the residents. The definition of “poverty” is strongly related to what stated in studies about quality of life; actually, it does not depend only on expenditure capability: in fact, the employment status of the householder and the family asset are relevant as well. Then, it is simpler thinking about the standard, or living conditions, of a community, i.e. the set of goods and facilities available to people and that people can get. These observations have been the base of a multi-disciplinary research that, engaging sociologists, jurists, architects, economists and statisticians, had the aim to investigate families living standard in Palermo. In the first step of the analysis, the interest was focused on a small area because it is a privileged one thanks to its historical, environmental and cultural conditions: if we want to stop the slow and increasing deterioration it is necessary a relevant political intervention. Then, as a second step, it is basic the study of residents needs and related living condition problems.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".