MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088114849 · doi:10.1177/1474474012455000

Security and atonement: controlling access to the World Trade Center memorial

2012· article· en· W2088114849 on OpenAlexafffund
Benjamin Forest, Juliet Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueCultural Geographies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsAtonementWorld trade centerAccess controlCenter (category theory)Subject (documents)DistractionPolitical scienceSociologyComputer securityHistoryMedia studiesTerrorismLawLibrary scienceComputer sciencePhilosophyPsychologyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Visitors are subject to extensive access-control procedures at the open but as-yet unfinished World Trade Center (WTC) memorial site. This is in sharp contrast to the open plaza envisioned in Michael Arad’s finished design. We argue that rather than being merely a pragmatic security measure or a distraction from the memorial, such access-control can be best understood as a public ritual of atonement for the security failures that led to the 9/11 attacks.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.449
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCultural GeographiesSame topicEvacuation and Crowd DynamicsFrench-language works237,207