MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209829499 · doi:10.1080/01426397.2021.1989393

Trajectories of practice across time: moving beyond the histories of landscape architecture

2021· article· en· W3209829499 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLandscape Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLandscape and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandscape historyFutures contractLandscape architectureArchitectureGeographyLandscape archaeologySociologyHistoryLandscape designEnvironmental ethicsEnvironmental resource managementEcologyArchaeologyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The established histories of landscape architecture are incongruous with emerging bodies of critical landscape practice. In response, we argue that, rather than adding more non-Western case studies to an existing so-called canon, a different model for positioning our practices within and across time is needed. This model is founded in the understanding of landscape as a continuum of shifting relations across past, present, future. To illustrate, we turn to two examples of landscape making practice in North America that engage across time by intentionally situating their work within the landscape continuum. We do not present these as case studies to be absorbed by a discipline, but as examples for how our own landscape practices might engage with and across time. No history belongs to us. We belong to a continuum of landscape making spanning past, present, and many futures.

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.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.282 · 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