Kentsel Unutulma: Kentsel Koruma Yaklaşımlarının Yer-kültür Kimliği Bağlamında AnkaraYahudi Mahallesi Üzerinden Bir Değerlendirmesi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cultural identity, whether it is physical or not, whether it is concerning a relatively specific community or the society as a whole, is worth protecting for future generations. Planning as a primary tool for conserving an urban place within the considerations of historical values based on both built environment and social structure, constantly manifests itself with conflicts in terms of retaining the cultural identity. Yet, integrating the cultural identity as a crucial aspect for urban conservation approaches have been considered insufficiently, especially in contemporary development practices. The crucial problem is the lack of emphasis on geographic and indigenous cultural features of identity. The necessity of emphasizing the spatiality of cultural identity, summons the incorporation of geo-cultural identity concept with urban practices. Thus, it is possible to distinguish Ulus, the old core of Ankara, in terms of the importance of cultural values and collective memory from not only the physical layout but also cultural structure of the area. In this sense, Jewish Quarter is a significant area with its diverse cultural background and intricate physical state. This study will consider urban oblivion as a spatial reflection of geo-cultural identity loss and will make a contribution to the literature in the ways of integrating the concept of geo-cultural identity to urban conservation practices. Archived maps and plans will investigate in order to reading of the area within the planning process. Moreover, interviews will be conducted to examine the causality of geo-cultural identity loss of Jewish Quarter. Therefore study will develop an evaluation on guiding the future studies of urban conservation context concerning geo-cultural identity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.004 |
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".