MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Conservation and Adaptive Re-Use of the Bakirköy Spirit Factory in Istanbul

2004· article· en· W2078705049 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yegan Kâhya, Yıldız Salman, Nur Akın

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Architectural Conservation · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFactory (object-oriented programming)ArchitectureSettlement (finance)EngineeringQuarter (Canadian coin)Ottoman empireTurkishLeaseRubbleManagementArchitectural engineeringArchaeologyHistoryCivil engineeringPolitical scienceLawBusinessComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Bakirköy Spirit Factory is a late Ottoman industrial building dating from 1917. It was constructed as part of a military complex that produced gunpowder and remained in use until the fall of the Ottoman Empire in the first quarter of the twentieth century. Following the construction of a new housing settlement in the district in the 1980s, the dilapidated building became part of a dense residential zone. Its lease to a restaurant in 1986 resulted in the execution of unauthorized works, during which its original machinery and some of its architectural characteristics were lost as a result of inappropriate interventions. The adaptive re-use project that forms the focus of this paper was prepared by members of the Faculty of Architecture at Istanbul Technical University. The building was transformed into a conservatory and cultural centre and was inaugurated in May 2000. The implementation won the National Architectural Prize of the Turkish Chamber of Architects in the Conservation Field in 2001.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

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 studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.100 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Architectural ConservationSame topicCultural Heritage Management and PreservationFrench-language works237,207