MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7099010731

1 | P a g e

2013· article· en· W7099010731 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotanical Studies and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrban planningLegislationSpatial planningParticipatory planningLand-use planningChristian ministryCitizen journalismProperty (philosophy)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: This paper reflects on the relationship between the free market and urban planning in Albania. It first illustrates how state-market relations have had an impact on urban planning in Albania’s recent history. It is then structured around a set of common misunderstandings and experiences about urban planning that are identified by Barrie Needham. It concludes with the direction for the future of urban planning in Albania. Key words: urban and spatial planning, land management, property rights This paper is produced for the project ‘Fostering partnerships for equitable cities, capacity building for participatory spatial planning’, implemented by IHS (Rotterdam) and Co-PLAN (Tirana) in Albania. This project is financially supported by the Social Transformation Programme (Matra) of the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The paper is based on a review of relevant literature, legislation and the experience in the field of Co-PLAN and IHS. Urban planning and the free market in Albania

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.626
Threshold uncertainty score0.893

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3740.183

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.156 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

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 topicBotanical Studies and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207