MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2489035377 · doi:10.7202/1069618ar

Béton et utopie avant 1914 : architecture et « moule social »

2020· article· en· W2489035377 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Laurent Baridon

Bibliographic record

VenueRACAR Revue d art canadienne · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectureSine qua nonEmbodied cognitionAestheticsHarmony (color)PerfectionConstructiveUtopiaSociologyEpistemologyPhilosophyArtArt historyVisual artsPolitical scienceComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The utopian reformers of the nineteenth century, while they describe houses and towns, seem to have mistrusted the architects who hoped to materialize them. Those who did try were either ostracized or blamed for the repeated failures of the projects. This can be explained by the misunderstandings that were bound to appear between the ambiguities of utopian thought and the positive, heuristic character of architectural design. The problem raised by the actual building of edifices was ignored by the utopians, while the architects and the urbanists saw it as a sine qua non. Victor Considérant, by coining the concept of feasibility (“réalisabilité”), opened the way to the construction of J.B.A. Godin’s Familistère. To attain “harmony,” the architect had to conceive a “social mould,” as Victor Calland said, which was to modify human beings biologically. Concrete, a building material popularized by François Coignet, a disciple of Fourier’s, embodied this new hope founded on architecture. Inexpensive and malleable, it seemed suitable for the building of edifices whose organic character was designed to promote the transformation of the individual and of the society striving for perfection.

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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.016
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRACAR Revue d art canadienneSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207