MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2903092570 · doi:10.22215/etd/2017-11863

Revealing Memory: Rehabilitating Pedestrian Experience at The Central Experimental Farm

2017· dissertation· en· W2903092570 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
H. Ganse Little

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmerican Environmental and Regional History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyMultitudeRecreationCultural landscapePsychological resilienceReading (process)GeographyEnvironmental ethicsSociologyHistoryAestheticsPolitical scienceArchaeologyPoliticsPsychologyArtSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Landscape is one of the richest historical records available to us. A mirror of our beliefs, ideologies, and memories – each layer is gradually built up over time, contributing to the complex spirit of place. By learning to read the landscape we can begin to pull apart these layers of time, revealing memory, and therefore enabling us to better understand ourselves and our history. This thesis proposes the reading of a monumental cultural landscape in the heart of the Nation’s Capital: The Central Experimental Farm. A unique mix of national heritage, scientific legacy, and active research landscape, the Farm provides a multitude of ecological, economic, social, recreational, and educational opportunities to Ottawa. By investigating the complex layers of this cultural landscape, this thesis seeks to share those discoveries through a renewed pedestrian experience throughout the Farm, ensuring the resilience and longevity of this historic landscape in the face of change.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0110.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAmerican Environmental and Regional History→French-language works237,207→