MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3032450184

Internment “Homes” as Material Texts: The Architecture of Canada’s New Denver Internment Camp

2017· article· en· W3032450184 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anoma Pieris

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerva Access (University of Melbourne) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture, Design, and Social History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectureHistoryGenealogyArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada’s history of wartime civilian internment of the Japanese Canadian population approximates that of the US both in its colonial policies and its hostility to Asian immigration during the early twentieth century. In both these examples, exclusion and punishment was connected to the denial of ‘home’. But the facilities produced to accommodate internees in each of these nations differed: purpose built barracks in rigid urban grids were used in the US and work camps and extant buildings were repurposed and individual houses built in Canada. This paper examines how the idealised model of the settler colonial home is stripped of its values of individualism and security and reproduced as a site of abjection and confinement. It follows the transformation of the home through internment interpreting the typology used to incarcerate, emplace and commemorate internment as a fragmented material text. The paper’s focus is the Canadian internment, the camps at New Denver, British Columbia and the Nikkei Internment Memorial Centre, built on the site of a former internment camp.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Not applicablelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Qualitativelow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.587

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0310.029
Scholarly communication0.0130.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable · Qualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueMinerva Access (University of Melbourne)Same topicArchitecture, Design, and Social HistoryFrench-language works237,207