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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both institutional and architectural history places the asylum alongside the prison and the workhouse, whose design characteristics emphasize confinement and control. this connectin obfuscates important differences in how ideas about treatment were reflected in particular architectural design. In other words, there have been few attempts to understand how the physical structure of the asylum became part of its medical discourse, and no attempts to research the treatment programme evolving as a result of the designers' intentions and becoming part of the asylum's architecture. Every researcher working in the field of the history of asylum's acknowledgements the importance of the York Retreat an its policy of ‘moral treatment’ in influencing the course of nineteenth-century asylum construction. Since the investigation, the influece of The Retreat needs to be evaluatedin light of the research. This article will focus on the correspondence between the founder of The York Retreat. William tuke, and its architect, John Bevans. I will present their discussions on the design of The Retreat within the context of their perceptions of insanity and their beliefs in ‘moral treatment’ to show how the intentionality of design is realized in architectural form.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it