MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Visitors' Long‐term Memories of World Expositions

2003· article· en· W1975760183 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurator The Museum Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMuseums and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDivision of Mathematical Sciences
KeywordsExhibitionFace (sociological concept)Scale (ratio)Term (time)PsychologySociologyMedia studiesVisual artsHistoryGeographySocial scienceArtCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This article reports on the outcomes of a study that investigated the nature and character of visitors' long‐term memories associated with their experiences at large‐scale exhibitions. The study investigated themes that characterized visitors' memories of two global exhibitions: World Expo 86, hosted in Vancouver, Canada in 1986; and World Expo 88, hosted in Brisbane, Australia in 1988. There are a few studies in the literature that have considered long‐term memories associated with visits to informal learning environments, but no studies to date that have considered the impact and long‐term memories associated with large‐scale exhibitions such as world expositions. This study probed the long‐term memories of a total of 50 visitors who attended either Expo 86 or Expo 88, through in‐depth face‐to‐face interviews. Analysis of the interview data suggests that the key themes in memories of these events center on the social dimensions of visitors' experiences, visitors' recalled agendas at the time of the experience, and the socio‐cultural identities of visitors at the time of the experience.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.204 · 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