MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392214449 · doi:10.16995/ah.9636

Chloethiel Woodard Smith: Advancing through Exhibitions

2024· article· en· W4392214449 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathleen James-Chakraborty

Bibliographic record

VenueArchitectural Histories · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntellectual Property Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chloethiel Woodard Smith (1910–1992) was the most successful female architect of her generation in the United States. From 1963 to 1983 she ran a large independent practice in Washington, DC. Crucial to her career was her role in the organization of four exhibitions, held in Washington in 1939, in Montreal in 1941, in Havana in 1950, and in Moscow in 1958. Allowing others to largely take credit for work that she played a disproportionate part in organizing helped her win her the respect of an overwhelmingly male profession. In 1960 she was elected a fellow of the American Institute of Architects; at that time, only five women had previously received that honor, one bestowed partly as a result of the good will she had accumulated through her efforts. Smith’s involvement in exhibition design also trained her to think in terms of the public for which she designed rather than only in terms of an audience of her peers. This proved key to her ability to work with developers to build housing across much of the country and office buildings in downtown Washington that were popular with those who lived and worked in them.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.006

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchitectural HistoriesSame topicIntellectual Property LawFrench-language works237,207