MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399853829 · doi:10.4324/9781003224662-16

Looking Softly at Architectural History

2024· book-chapter· en· W4399853829 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joan Coutu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture, Design, and Social History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter positions women’s scholarship within the historiography of the eighteenth-century British country house and the architectural history of Canada, each corresponding to the centre and colonial-settler periphery of the British empire. In step with postcolonial and decolonisation strategies, the chapter articulates challenges to the hegemony of formalism and the Eurocentric canon. In the context of the country house, Dana Arnold’s early edited volumes put forward non-formalist approaches, including class, gender, and dissemination. These were joined by the work of several women from outside the discipline of architectural history – Amanda Vickery and Kate Retford amongst them – who, by exploring ‘soft’ concepts such as identity, home, domesticity, and tradition, deepened the consideration of the country house. The chapter then examines the tenacious grip of formalism in Canada, conditioned by Canada’s colonial legacy and reliance on the United States. With a few exceptions, this also kept women from the centre of academe, relegating them to the marginalised heritage sector. Yet, ironically, it was from there, with the focus on vernacular, non-Anglo, and Indigenous sites, that the study of architectural history began to shift, ultimately easing the way for multiple ways of knowing that now shape how we consider the built environment.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.683
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0590.005

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.159 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 topicArchitecture, Design, and Social HistoryFrench-language works237,207