Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article explores the reconstruction of Jerusalem’s Jewish Quarter after the 1967 war, with an emphasis on the area’s emergence as a symbolic Israeli landscape. The post-1967 Jewish Quarter became a symbol of national renewal and of Jewish control over united Jerusalem. In fact, it was the destruction during the 1948 war and the severe neglect in its aftermath that provided Israel the opportunity to recreate the area’s geography and history, to design and build it anew from both a physical and a symbolic standpoint. After 1967, primarily during the formative years of the 1970s and 1980s, various agents—politicians, planners, contractors, archeologists, clergy, cultural groups, and private people—had their impact on the revival of the Jewish Quarter. Together, they crafted a new landscape whose connection to the pre-1948 neighborhood is extremely vague. By drawing from the quarter’s past in a selective manner, these agents created new forms of historical memory, which helped forge and bolster Israeli identity and pride. At the end of this process, it is doubtful whether the symbolic values of the Jewish Quarter as one can experience them today were developed according to ideas that the government agents had in the beginning of its reconstruction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".