Bibliographic record
Abstract
The following thesis will explore the contemporary meaning of ‘Place’ and the lost relationship between human sensitivity -both emotional and physical- and the setting, which together would form the very definition of a place, and will make an attempt to re-define this relationship. By returning to the basic definition of place, this paper emphasizes the fact that place without memory is simply space without meaning and that unlike places of our time that put little emphasis on the embodied memory, memory of place is experienced through not only mind but also the entire body. The paper will take a bottom-up approach where ‘Space’ as a fundamental element of ‘Place’ and its transformation to place is discussed. There will be a comprehensive discussion on place itself and the role and ability of embodied memory in creation of place. Each section will make an effort to consider the current circumstances of ‘Place’ and how they might be transformed to establish a relationship between embodied memory of space and the physical location. Here, senses, movement and basic orientation of the body will be discussed as elements empowering the embodied memory and having the ability to transform spaces–or non-places- of our time into place. Movement if not one of our five senses, inspires us to engage our whole body; we see, touch and smell what surrounds us, and also understand the setting in the sense that we engage or interact with it. The design project will explore the act of movement as the fundamental element of forming embodied memory of ‘Space’ and transforming it into ‘Place’. Element of path, which links two significant nodes - one known as a place and another a non-place- will be incorporated to represent the act of movement and its impact on creation of a ‘Place’.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.007 |
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".