MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Holocaust Museums and Memorials

2021· reference-entry· en· W4206599921 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMemory, Trauma, and Commemoration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe HolocaustDeportationNazi concentration campsHistoryInterpretation (philosophy)SculptureWorld War IIVisual artsArtArchaeologyNazismLawPolitical scienceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Holocaust memorials can be categorized according to the evolution of the genre. The first type of memorials are the historical sites of discrimination and destruction themselves, such as concentration and extermination camps, transit camps, ghettos, forced labor camps, and sites of mass executions, as well as sites where hiding, rescue, and other life-saving operations took place. The second category, which developed immediately after the war, includes plaques and monuments dedicated to the memory of Holocaust victims. In many cases, these monuments are erected in the places where the victims came from; the victims can be identified individually, with some personal details (e.g., age, occupation, etc.), or as part of a specific group (residents of a building, student body of a school, denizens of a town, etc.). These memorials, located all over Europe where the victims originated, follow traditional artistic patterns, such as plaques, allegorical sculptures, and rare figurative expressions. The third and more recent category comprises memorial museums, a complex combination of two institutions: a memorial, with its commemorative purpose, and a museum, with its collection, conservation, documentation, and educational missions. Such institutions are not necessarily located in cities where deportation and/or extermination took place, but may also be established where significant survivor populations settled after the war and took it upon themselves to commemorate the Holocaust: Israel, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa, Argentina. Most recent memorial museums are also architectural artworks that add an artistic interpretation to the historical content: broken lines, voids, grids, narrow spaces, and dead ends are some of the design traits that contribute to express the loss and destruction in more abstract ways. Scholarship about Holocaust memorials has appeared and evolved in parallel with the memorials themselves. First came the historical accounts and testimonials about specific sites of destruction, then guides to monuments, followed by monographs about types of memorials (geographical focus with studies about public memory in Germany, France, or Poland, or artistic focus with counter-monuments). Later came the studies of memorial museums, whether as monographs or in a comparative approach, sometimes in a global perspective. More recently, a number of scholars have examined Holocaust memorials in relation with other phenomena, such as commodification and tourism, space, religious practices, memory politics, and appropriation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1070.016

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMemory, Trauma, and CommemorationFrench-language works237,207