MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390588014 · doi:10.1177/14696053231220926

(Re)calibrating heritage: Al-Jdeideh (post-)conflict transformations in Aleppo, Syria

2024· article· en· W4390588014 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Diana Salahieh, Saeed Asaeed, Layla Zibar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social Archaeology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnographyContext (archaeology)Quarter (Canadian coin)Aleppo PineCultural heritageEveryday lifeSociologyPolitical scienceHistoryArchaeologyAnthropologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines how armed conflict impacts the recalibration of Aleppo’s historic urban and cultural fabric, using the Al-Jdeideh quarter as a case study. This article critically reflects on the ongoing (post-)conflict, top-down (post-)reconstruction activities in Aleppo’s historic core, drawing on ethnographic research of visual mapping and semi-structured interviews with current Aleppo dwellers in the city and former dwellers displaced across Europe. Our findings highlight that the current reconstruction activities lack locals’ values and needs, and amplify the altered socio-economic dynamics between the (former) communities’ absence and presence. Therefore, these activities are resulting in a skewed representation of what once was a major hub of culture, commerce, heritage, and everyday life. As such, the paper argues that the current reconstruction attempts lack a comprehensive and context-specific approach, and need to explore more inclusive pathways of human-centered and sustainable recovery.

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)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Social ArchaeologySame topicCultural Heritage Management and PreservationFrench-language works237,207