MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W385080471 · doi:10.3130/jaabe.14.255

On Kil-Ryong Park: ″Housing is a Vessel Containing People′s Lives″

2015· article· en· W385080471 on OpenAlexaff
Yoonchun Jung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicKorean Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersHarvard University
KeywordsModernityVernacularColonialismHistorySociologyEconomyAestheticsPolitical scienceArtLawLiteratureArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the early 1920s, the first generation of Korean architects educated under the Japanese Government-General of Korea, emerged in the Korean colonial space. One of these architects, Kil-Ryong Park (1898-1943), being influenced by the theory of architectural evolutionism prevalent among contemporary Japanese architects residing in Korea as well as the environmental-determinism-influenced Japanese understanding of the development of Korean minka (vernacular housing), focused his attention on traditional Korean housing from the early 1920s. The paper analyzes how he came up with his own perspective on Korean housing reformation, which was strongly influenced by his experiential knowledge of Korean living customs and their regional characteristics, such as the effects of climate and natural environments. Following the Romantic sense of modernity, described by Octavio Paz as ″a tradition against itself″ (Paz, 1974)1, the paper illustrates an alternative way to understand Korean architectural modernity during the colonial period, an understanding that differs from the current stylistic discussions on the subject.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Asian Architecture and Building EngineeringSame topicKorean Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207