MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<b>Інклюзивність при ревіталізації виробничих територій на прикладі мікрорайону «Чайка» у місті Рівному</b>

2025· article· W7131430361 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueСучасні технології та методи розрахунків у будівництві · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUkrainian Legal and Forensic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUkrainianCitizen journalismUrban planningInclusion (mineral)IncentiveMainstreamingConsolidation (business)Politics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the importance of integrating the principles of inclusion at all stages of planning and implementing projects for revitalization of neglected, in particular, post-industrial urban production areas. The current Ukrainian regulatory framework in the field of inclusion is analyzed, in particular the requirements of state building codes, as well as current political initiatives, in particular the National Strategy for Creating a Barrier-Free Space by 2030. The authors analyze the principles of inclusion in the urban context, highlight the Ukrainian regulatory and legal basis for creating a barrier-free environment, as well as the experience of applying the principles of universal design, spatial accessibility, and social justice in revitalization practice. The study provides examples of practical implementation of an inclusive approach in the revitalization of urban areas in Ukraine (Lviv, Kyiv) and abroad (Canada, Great Britain), which allows us to identify universal indicators of inclusiveness, such as: physical accessibility, functional flexibility, participatory nature and preservation of cultural identity. The authors also identify key challenges, including the fragmentation of approaches, the lack of mandatory social impact analysis, and formalized public discussion. The article formulates a number of recommendations for adapting an inclusive approach to Ukrainian realities, in particular through regulatory consolidation of participation procedures, development of institutional support mechanisms, and financial incentives for the implementation of universal design.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.688
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.011
Science and technology studies0.0090.010
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0070.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.010

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.266 · 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