Questions on space and intersections in the historiography of modern Brazilian architecture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This text proposes a spatial approach to a particular historiographical analysis: the deconstruction of the Brazilian modern architecture narrative as advanced by its main proponent architect, Lúcio Costa. The analysis is advanced from three different perspectives. The first concerns the place from within the Brazilian modern architecture narrative occupied by Lúcio Costa during the 1930s, a period of major cultural unrest under the Estado Novo dictatorship (1937–1945). The second invokes the field of cultural geography, scrutinising Costa’s understanding of the concept of history and the way he understood and used the notions of transferences, exchanges and dialogues both in the cultural space of the time and between the past and the historical present. Costa’s commitments to the assertion of a national identity emerge in contrast to the supranational character of North American scholars George Kubler and Robert Chester Smith’s formulations on Latin American art and architecture. The third and last perspective introduces the idea of cultural dialogue, following the tradition of the spatial theoretical formulations developed by Georg Simmel and Martin Buber during the first quarter of the twentieth century.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".