MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057912584 · doi:10.3828/bjcs.20.2.4

The British Pavilion at Expo '67: Art, Architecture and National Identity

2007· article· en· W2057912584 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brian Edwards, Susan Fahy

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Canadian Studies · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicArchitecture, Modernity, and Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Chicago
KeywordsPavilionArchitectureSculptureIdeologyIdentity (music)ExhibitionAestheticsSociologyArt historyHistoryVisual artsArtLawArchaeologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The British architect Sir Basil Spence designed the British pavilion at Expo '67 in a style which controversially combined elements of national identity with the innovative use of steel-framing and asbestos sheeting. The design departed from orthodoxy and was seen by reviewers more as sculpture than architecture. In realising the design Spence worked with a firm of architects based in Montreal and associated with McGill University, where they were also members of the architecture faculty. The first part of the article explores the ideological basis for the Spence design, its cultural and artistic references, the collaboration with artists, and finally the mechanisms (including construction) employed to bring the design to fruition. The second part investigates the responses to the British pavilion comparing the opinions expressed in Canada to those in the UK, and contrasting popular reaction to comments in the architectural press. Finally, the article reflects upon Expo as a place of design experimentation and the role the Spence pavilion played in this. The paper speculates that one of the first expressions of postmodernism in architecture is to be found at Expo '67.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

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 studies0.0130.019
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Canadian StudiesSame topicArchitecture, Modernity, and DesignFrench-language works237,207