Bibliographic record
Abstract
Product Review| June 01 2020 Review: City Dreamers, directed by Joseph Hillel Joseph Hillel, director City Dreamers Couzin Films, Montreal, 2018, 81 min., https://www.citydreamersfilm.com Patricia A. Morton Patricia A. Morton University of California, Riverside Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians (2020) 79 (2): 235–237. https://doi.org/10.1525/jsah.2020.79.2.235 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Patricia A. Morton; Review: City Dreamers, directed by Joseph Hillel. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 1 June 2020; 79 (2): 235–237. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/jsah.2020.79.2.235 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentJournal of the Society of Architectural Historians Search Joseph Hillel has written, produced, and directed a number of documentary and fiction films, including the award-winning Regular or Super: Views on Mies van der Rohe (2004). Aimed at general audiences, his documentaries range in subject matter from the story of Haiti's revolution to the life of photographer Yousuf Karsh. As a look at Hillel's filmography makes clear, his primary focus is not architecture.1 However, his most recent documentary, City Dreamers, presents the lives and work of four pioneering women architects—Phyllis Lambert, Blanche Lemco van Ginkel, Cornelia Hahn Oberlander, and Denise Scott Brown—who, for decades, have observed and transformed the urban environment. These women's careers span an era of extraordinary change in which they were active agents, encompassing the triumph of international modernism, the rise of historic preservation, and the emergence of environmentalism in architecture, landscape architecture, and urban design. All have had significant impacts on the cities... You do not currently have access to this content.
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 | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.126 | 0.122 |
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".