MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2253755706 · doi:10.18192/clg-cgl.v5i1-2.1468

Mapping the Intangibilities of the Historic Centre of Porto: ParticipA(C)TION (and its Challenges) in Cultural Mapping Projects

2015· article· en· W2253755706 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCulture and Local Governance · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and sociocultural dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
KeywordsOperationalizationNegotiationPolitical scienceCitizen journalismSociologyCorporate governanceHumanitiesPublic administrationSocial scienceManagementEpistemologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article focuses on cultural mapping projects as a strategy for urban development. In particular, it analyzes how one of the most important cultural mapping matrices – its participatory mission – can be operationalized. Moving away from other projects where participation is merely rhetoric or is interpreted with little depth (for example, exchange of information, consultation), the public project Manobras no Porto serves to analyze: 1) how a broad and deep concept of participation can be implemented in practice (and under what circumstances can it be successful) and 2) what kind of results can be achieved. In addition to the potential practical interest, the article also aims to contribute to deepening the debate on cultural mapping. The analysis clearly shows that participation involves a large and complex set of motivations and abilities, and that understanding how cultural mapping projects are developed (and their impact on the territory) requires that they be understood as exercises of negotiation between the agents involved.Keywords: cultural mapping, participation, governance, urban development, ‘Manobras no Porto’ project, PortugalRésumé: Cet article discute de l’importance de la cartographie culturelle en tant que stratégie de développement urbain. En particulier, cet article analyse en quoi la mission participative de la cartographie culturelle peut être opérationnalisée. De plus, cet article prend une distance visà-vis des projets où la participation revêt un caractère strictement rhétorique ou symbolique se limitant à l’échange d’information ou à la consultation et ce, afin d’aborder des expériences où la participation s’exprime de manière plus complète. Afin d’élaborer sur la question, le propos s’appuie sur le projet de Manobras no Porto afin d’analyser : 1) la portée et la profondeur des méthodes de participatives ainsi que les circonstances qui participent à leur succès; 2) le type de résultants auquel l’on peut s’attendre. En plus des enjeux pratiques soulevés par cette étude, cet article vise à contribuer à l’approfondissement théorique de la question de la cartographie culturelle. L’analyse met clairement en évidence la diversité des aptitudes et motivations découlant de la participation à la cartographie culturelle. Il devient alors essentiel que le sens et les enjeux de la cartographie culturelle soient négociés par les acteurs concernés.Mots clé: cartographie culturelle, participation, gouvernance, développement urbain, projet ‘Manobras no Porto’, Portugal

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 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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.165 · 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