MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W170466223

Wings, gender and architecture : remembering Bath, England

2002· dissertation· en· W170466223 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cynthia Imogen Hammond

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2002
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture, Design, and Social History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistory of architectureArchitectureScholarshipAgency (philosophy)Gender studiesFeminismGeorgianSociologyAestheticsVisual artsArtSocial scienceLawPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis is a cultural study of the city of Bath, England. Bath's tourist industry currently uses Neo-classical architectural heritage to foster an incomplete vision of the past, void of working-class women's history. As a feminist analysis of Bath's architecture, this study takes examples of medieval and Georgian building and Gothic revival in Bath to reveal the gendered underpinnings of architectural discourse at large. At the symbolic core of this discourse in Bath is a mythical figure, the winged male architect, which suggests that architectural achievement is a form of transcendence unavailable to women, both historically and, by extension, in the present. The "feminine" equivalents of the winged male architect--the angel in the house and the fallen woman--are subject to critique here for the ways in which their construction denies historical women the capacity for both creativity and agency. This study therefore presents and analyses archival evidence of women's history in Bath in relation to Bath's architectural history. Based on the assumption that feminist scholarship is a heuristic activity, this doctoral project also documents performance art projects and collective, public art strategies involving the author and other women artists, in Bath and Montréal, Canada. These artistic interventions into the "public" sphere of the city are an attempt to bring the practice of feminist ethics to bear on history, architecture and public memory

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicArchitecture, Design, and Social HistoryFrench-language works237,207