Private and public memories of Expo 67: a case study of recollections of Montreal's World's Fair, 40 years after the event
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper discusses the results of a long-term memory study in which fifty visitors to Expo 67 (25 participants from British Columbia and 25 from Quebec) shared their recollections of their personal experience forty years after the event. The impetus for this study stems from a desire to understand the long-term impact of visitors’ experience in informal, leisure-time contexts, and, particularly in large-scale exhibitions. This paper presents and discusses outcomes that elucidate the nature of personal memories of Expo 67 and in relation to the collective memory of cultural events/productions. Moreover, the study illustrates and discusses an interesting paradox of personal memories of the event. Specifically, most visitors report common themes surrounding the memory of self (the script of events, the things they saw and did), yet almost all participants report highly idiosyncratic stories that are mediated by their personal identities, and more so, the recollection and perception of the national significance of Expo 67 appears clearly differentiated by cultural communities to which they are affiliated. These understandings provide insights that assist museums and similar institutions employing exhibit media to comprehend the long-term impact of visitors’ experiences.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".