MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1597735225

Site Surfeit: Office for Soft Architecture Makes the City Confess

2016· article· en· W1597735225 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jennifer Scappettone

Bibliographic record

VenueChicago Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt, Politics, and Modernism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitecturePlot (graphics)PoetrySincerityParagraphHistoryObject (grammar)LiteratureSociologyVisual artsArt historyLawLinguisticsArtPhilosophyArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

That mute paysage possesses knowledge; it sees you too. Any language that would heed these facts- that could live up to land or cityscape now, and to its contents encompassed by the presently omnipresent term - has to plot out a hearkening, not an anthropological or aesthetic seizure. That isn't simple; its tantamount to calling for a poetic, a system built out of abeyance. Within an architecture of poetry and vice versa that we could in sincerity call site-specific, sites grammar comes to occupy description, its nomenclature possesses vigilant trifling consciousness; Site peers through language to change me. Lately it makes me corporate. An index mixed by Stacy Doris, the author of Conference, archives the effluent introduction to Lisa Robertsons Occasional Work and Seven Walks from the Office for Soft Architecture under a couple of apparently nonconverging foci: I became money and return. How does this work? Rummaging back through the pink black and grey pocketbook to its counterpenetrable opener, one is pointed to these essays' genesis in the altering urban texture of Vancouver, from the sale of the Expo '86 site through the province's 2003 acquisition of the 2010 Winter Olympics. A paragraph records the premise of their authorship:

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)0.003
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0830.016

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChicago ReviewSame topicArt, Politics, and ModernismFrench-language works237,207