Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay examines the Dr. Sun Yat-Sen Classical Chinese Garden in Vancouver through a sociocultural lens. Positioned in Chinatown within Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside (DTES), the garden is the first authentic Ming Dynasty-style scholar’s garden outside of China. Operating as both a public park managed by the Vancouver Park Board, as well as a paid garden managed by a nonprofit organization, the garden symbolizes an intersection of Canadian and Chinese cultures, offering a distinctive lens for analyzing cultural interplay. The concepts of the «contact zone» as well as assemblage theory are central to understanding the garden’s role in facilitating cross-cultural dialogues. Influenced by scholars like James Clifford and Mary Louise Pratt, the garden serves as a physical and conceptual space where cultures converge, fostering interpersonal dialogue among visitors of varied backgrounds. Philipp Schorch’s expansion of the contact zone to museum spaces offers a framework for analyzing the garden as representing Chinese culture in Vancouver as well as tying the garden to its locality. The analysis of the garden extends beyond its own confines and over its walls, exposing and exploring the complex relationship the garden has to its surrounding space, the DTES, and Chinatown.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".