MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008138355 · doi:10.3138/g702-7264-r2v7-6426

The Mountain Panorama and Its Significance in the Scottish Context

2001· article· en· W2008138355 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michael Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueCartographica The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPanoramaContext (archaeology)HumanitiesGeographyTourismArtArchaeologyVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The panorama is an art form, which grew significantly in importance during the nineteenth century. A summary of this evolution is offered, especially with relation to the Alps. Although some similarities exist between the Alps and the Scottish mountains in their history and growth of mountaineering and tourism, perhaps surprisingly this does not include the tourist panorama. Some examples of Scottish panoramas (and of similar pictorial forms) from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries are described, but there is no evidence of a demand for their mass production as occurred in the Alps. The nature and significance of more recent panoramic images of Scottish mountains are examined, and their potential value for both visitors and the environment in the future. Le panorama est une forme d'art qui a significativement prit de l'importance durant le 19e sicle. Un rsum de cette volution est propos ici, et traite plus particulirement des Alpes. Il existe des similarits entre les Alpes et les montagnes cossaises en ce qui concerne leur histoire et l'augmentation du tourisme et des activits de montagne. Cependant, il n'y aucune similitude concernant les panoramas touristiques. En effet, mªme s'il existe en Ecosse quelques exemples de panoramas ou de formes picturales comparables au 19e et au dbut du 20e sicle, il n'existe aucune preuve vidente de leur fabrication en srie, comme dans les Alpes. La nature et la signification de panoramas cossais plus rcents sont analyss ici, ainsi que leur valeur potentielle pour les utilisateurs et l'environnement futur.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCartographica The International Journal for Geographic Information and GeovisualizationSame topicHistorical Art and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207