MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4235500955 · doi:10.22215/etd/2012-07088

Revisiting Markham's town plan : an Asian Canadian settlement

2012· dissertation· en· W4235500955 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Ethnicity, and Economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSettlement (finance)Plan (archaeology)GeographyArchaeologyHistoryBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the second part of the nineteenth century, waves of Chinese immigration have left a deep and transformative imprint on Canadian society. Traditional Chinatowns in every Canadian metropolitan region signal the presence of Asian communities in the commercial built environment, but the question of Chinese society's physical imprint on the residential landscape is yet to be fully considered. While the number of Chinese commercial developments and "ethnic malls" (the new "Chinatowns") in urban and suburban areas of major immigrant areas has increased in recent years, adjacent residential neighbourhoods tend to be designed according to conventional North American models and their English and European antecedents. This thesis examines the question of cultural hybridity in contemporary architecture, and, more specifically, the possibility of an urban planning and of an architectural language inspired by Asian built culture, noting that China is itself in the midst of a huge transformation. Focusing its research on the proposed master plan for Markham Ontario, this thesis explores traditional Asian spatial and temporal conceptions regarding built form and the garden, and the theme of "integration." The counterproposal for Markham Town Plan presented in this thesis offers a critique of the proposed master plan by the Remington Group, with a view to better serving a community who cherishes walk-ability in a dense environment and fluid relationships between generations. The proposal seeks to provide a built setting for the integration of daily domestic life with social ritual and the spaces of shared cultural memory.

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)0.002
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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0320.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same topicMigration, Ethnicity, and Economy→French-language works237,207→