Mapscapes on the Urban Surface: Notes in the Form of a Photo Essay (Istanbul, 2010)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Historical maps displayed in power-related settings have often been considered from a critical, representational perspective and have been researched with regard to their predictive, ideological content. With the recent emergence of a post-representational approach to cartography, a call for contextual creative research on maps “in the wild” has emerged. The consideration of pervasive digital cartography has increased attention toward aspects such as context-specific design, display formats, and areas. Common people encounter these digital “cartifacts,” as well as more traditional ones, within the everyday urban environment (mainly as part of city wallscapes). Photography could be used to profitably research “mapscapes” as they are perceived, lived, and felt. The photographic selective reading of cartographic signs on urban surfaces, beyond being a means of playfully engaging the material spatialities of maps, could also serve as a tool for generating map theorization. A photo essay based on cartographic encounters in Istanbul in 2010 is provided here as an example of creative exchange between map studies and visual methodologies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".