MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384697748 · doi:10.22215/etd/2023-15512

Unearthing History, Memory, and Creativity: A Park in Ottawa for Artistic Production

2023· dissertation· en· W4384697748 on OpenAlexaffabout
S. Chung

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityLibrary and Archives Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityExcavationArchitectureSpace (punctuation)AestheticsVisual artsPublic historyHistoryArchitectural engineeringSociologyEngineeringArchaeologyArtPolitical scienceComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The thesis seeks to explore the creation of a city park that reveals aspects of the site history and offer spaces to ignite public culture and artistic imaginations through discovery and making.It seeks to explore a relationship between the history of the site experienced through cuts -forms of excavation that bring up cultural memories -and how the language of material studies discovered through artistic processes can influence architecture in creating a space of memory and cultural activity for the community.Can the notion of a cut through the land be a way of experiencing the landscape and its history?Can the language discovered from techniques of making -screen printing and casting of materials and objects found on the site -be translated into material and texture and become architectural form?Can the relationship of the cut in the ground, the capturing of history, and the influence of material studies inform a place for discovering the forgotten histories of a site and serve as a model for overlooked or neglected places around Ottawa? Can the result -simply put, a public parkoffer ways to resist needless development and return public land to citizens?iii ii To Professor Inderbir Singh Riar.I learned so much!There were so many discoveries this thesis year.Thank you for showing me how to draw as extension of thought through the hand and to talk while I draw to activate the imagination.Thank you for the many, many hours you spent with me to push design thinking and thesis thinking further.The work is so much more because of it.

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 score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.689

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0290.016
Scholarly communication0.0130.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.147 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCultural Heritage Management and PreservationFrench-language works237,207