MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037068878 · doi:10.22215/etd/2020-14019

Weaving a stronger community

2020· article· en· W3037068878 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laurence Massicotte

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicArchitecture and Computational Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsInstitutionPublic relationsWeavingSociologySet (abstract data type)Media studiesPolitical scienceEngineeringSocial scienceLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are now in a time when populations are migrating for political, economic and climatic reasons.Cities are more populous and diverse than ever.In an era of technologies and virtual social networks, our societies are disconnected, fragmented and polarized.To solve these large societal issues, we first need to reconnect; to know and care for our fellow citizens and neighbours.A great way to help build or re-build these bonds within a community is through social infrastructures such as community organizations but also all sorts of public facilities such as libraries, schools, cultural and sports facilities, parks and cafés, all places where people congregate.This thesis proposes the design of an alternative type of social infrastructure: a multifacetted community institution on the site of the abandoned Empress Theatre in Montreal.The design will focus on creating a set of spatial and programmatic relationships that stimulate the imagination and challenge conventional thinking, with the goal of prompting chance encounters that will help weave a stronger community.Thank you to Jonathan, for the moral support and for cooking ALL the meals near the end.Thank you to Alice, for being the voice of reason in doubtful moments.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.013
Open science0.0020.019
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.157 · 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
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArchitecture and Computational DesignFrench-language works237,207