MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323356245 · doi:10.1080/13527258.2023.2187858

Architecture of memorialisation: the Spitfire and the making of a memorial icon

2023· article· en· W4323356245 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine Palmer, Geoffrey R. Bird

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Heritage Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMemory, Trauma, and Commemoration
Canadian institutionsRoyal Roads University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIconArchitectureContext (archaeology)BattleNarrativeHistoryHistoriographyHistoricity (philosophy)AfterlifeSociologyAestheticsLiteratureLawArtAncient historyArchaeologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the Second World War, the Supermarine Spitfire played a pivotal role defending the British nation, notably during the 1940 Battle of Britain. Drawing from the aircraft’s historiography and its continuing afterlife, we discuss the constitutive elements supporting the Spitfire’s transformation from war plane to memorial icon for the British wartime experience. In the context of this machine as memorial, the elements comprising what we refer to as the architecture of memorialisation are narrative permanence, enchantment of war technology, dialogic geometry of remembrance and commemorative adaptive capacity. These elements work to silence war, killing and death and in so doing justify a nation’s values, its moral compass. While these four elements may be unique to this aircraft, the architecture of memorialisation is a conceptual framework for analysing other types of memorials including those that are contested or which reflect regimes of power or cultures of remembrance very different to those of the United Kingdom (UK). Diverse social and cultural contexts will reveal different constitutive elements of the architecture of memorialisation.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Heritage StudiesSame topicMemory, Trauma, and CommemorationFrench-language works237,207