MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2744219712 · doi:10.14296/rih/2014/2150

Review of 'World’s Fairs: A Global History of Exhibitions'

2017· article· en· W2744219712 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anthony Swift

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews in History · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMuseums and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhibitionHistoryVisual artsArtArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since London's Great Exhibition of 1851, world's fairs and international expositions have been an important global cultural phenomenon that has defined progress and modernity for hundreds of millions of visitors.They have displayed the achievements of industrial civilization and the latest technologies, while at the same time reinforcing national and ethno-cultural hierarchies, with exhibits ranging from scientific discoveries to human zoos.The world's fairs have also generated an impressive amount of documentation and material artifacts.The sheer variety of materials produced in tandem with the fairs is well represented in this online resource, which makes accessible an abundance of digitized materials relating to the world's fairs from archives and libraries in Canada, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States, including the vast Donald G. Larson world's fair collection at California State University, Fresno.World's Fairs: A Global History of Expositions comprises not only official documents, correspondence, catalogues, and other publications from the fairs, but also diaries, souvenirs, posters, postcards, songs, music scores, and sound recordings of interviews and music.The interviews are fascinating and offer insights into how visitors experienced the world's fairs, or at least how they remembered their 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.128
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReviews in HistorySame topicMuseums and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207