MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1512698091

Building Stones of Canada's Federal Parliament Buildings

2001· article· en· W1512698091 on OpenAlex
Dan Lawrence

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoscience Canada · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicBuilding materials and conservation
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParliamentMasonryArchaeologyGeologistHumanitiesPolitical scienceHistoryArtLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The building stones used in the Ottawa Parliament Buildings were mined from numerous quarries in Canada, United States, and several European nations.They were cut, placed and carved according to exacting procedures using the most up-to-date technology of the time. Construction of the rebuilt Centre Block, the focus of this article, was a protracted affair, interrupted by the demands of the1914-1918 Great War. Exterior stone of the Parliament Buildings has endured the ravages of weather, fire, seismic shaking and pollution. Recently, great effort and expense have been devoted to the restoration of the masonry elements of all of the buildings to ensure the continued viability of this National Historic Site.The role of the geologist, critical in the initial evaluation and selection of the building stone, was largely ignored until recently. Building restoration of late has also restored the role of the geologist, with the requirement to understand the complex reactions of the building stone to the environment and its neighbouring masonry elements, and in the quest to find suitable replacement stone. Resume Les pierres de construction utilisees pour les edifices du Parlement a Ottawa proviennent de nombreuses carrieres autant au Canada, aux Etats-Unis que de plusieurs pays europeens. Elles ont ete taillees, posees et sculptees suivant des procedes precis, en conformite avec les regles de l'art de l'epoque. La reconstruction de l'edifice du centre qui est le sujet du present article, a ete une affaire qui s'est etiree etant donne les priorites lors de la Grande Guerre de 1914-1918. Ces pierres de revetement des edifices du Parlement ont subi les avanies du climat, du feu, de tremblements de terre et de la pollution, et recemment, des efforts et des fonds considerables ont ete consentis pour la restauration des elements de maconnerie de tous les edifices afin d'assurer la perennite de ce site historique national. Le role determinant du geologue, lors de l'evaluation initiale et du choix des pierres, a ete largement ignore jusqu'a maintenant, mais la restauration des edifices a permis de remettre en valeur le role du geologue, parce qu'il fallait d'abord comprendre les reactions complexes des pierres de construction avec l'environnement et les autres elements de maconnerie avoisinants, afin de pouvoir trouver des pierres de remplacement convenables.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.555

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.175 · 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