MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7047034156

Establishing a cultural quarter in Abu Dhabi, UAE

2013· other· en· W7047034156 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique) · 2013
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Argument (complex analysis)Diversification (marketing strategy)CriticismCultural policySustainabilityCultural diversity
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main argument driving the thesis; namely the fact that the literature is treating cultural quarter development as mainly originating from the supply side with limited attention to the demand side (e.g., consumers' /visitors' preferences and tastes for prospective developments in the cultural scene). Thus, the analysis argues that more attention should be placed upon cultural quarter establishment, as opposed to cultural quarter production. For this purpose, the thesis engages into a quest to reveal individual preferences for future policy initiatives in the area. The thesis considers the case study, namely the proposed cultural quarter development in Saadiyat Island, in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (UAE). It provides a background on Abu Dhabi, the reason for focusing on cultural tourism, the Saadiyat island development and the planned activities' and cultural infrastructure to appear on the island. The thesis also considers the rationale behind . the project (i.e., diversification of the Emirate's economy) as well as the potential criticism that may arise (has risen as a result of this policy initiative) in the literature. The main argument in favour of this policy initiative is the diversification of the mono-culture nature of the domestic economy, whereas the main argument against such an initiative is that it will appear as an 'elitist' development not catering for native culture and tradition, thus failing to relate to native customs and cultural heritage. We argue that this issue will also have negative repercussions for the sustainability of the cultural quarter if not addressed properly from policy makers.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207