Bibliographic record
Abstract
Every modern city faces the challenge of how to engage the remains of its industrial past. Consciously or unconsciously, post-industrial cities have experienced a type of identity crisis after the decline of industries. Sites that once played a significant role in shaping their urban character are no longer economically productive. Some say these sites are akin to ancient ruins; however, the question of establishing an authentic connection between the contemporary city and its industrial past remains a cultural and architectural challenge. \n\tThe Lachine Canal in Montreal is a significant relic of Canadian industry. In the 19th century, industries were drawn to its edges to access water for both production and transportation of goods. Today, these obsolete machine-like structures lie dormant. Among them is Silo No. 5, which is located at the mouth of the Lachine Canal flow as it spills into the St. Lawrence River. Monumental in scale, the once productive structure has the magnitude of a great cathedral. \n\tAdmired by European modernist architects and historians, grain elevators like Silo No. 5 were identified as iconic structures of 20th Century architecture. This thesis seeks to re-invent and re-integrate Silo No. 5 into the contemporary city by reconciling its multiple identities. \n\tThe intent of this thesis is to understand not only the Lachine historic site, but also to celebrate the sublime atmosphere and the architectonic qualities of Silo No. 5. Two questions guide this exploration: “is it possible to re-introduce something obsolete back into the city?” and “how can we maintain the sublime power of the iconic industrial structure while at the same time allow it to become animated?”
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".