MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403847602 · doi:10.1080/23729333.2024.2396151

Mapping Tokyo Olympics 3.0: archaeologies of the future

2024· article· en· W4403847602 on OpenAlexafffund
Sharon Hayashi, Elina Lex

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cartography · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityYork University
FundersYork University
KeywordsGeographyRegional scienceHistoryMedia studiesArt historySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mapping Tokyo Olympics 3.0 is a collaborative sensory archive of demolition and displacement surrounding the three Tokyo Olympics. Understanding the Olympics as a cyclical `practice of subtraction,' where the city is not only rebuilt but unbuilt, we uncover the intertwined layers of the urban development history of these Games and the imperial (1940), high-growth (1964) and post-growth (2020/2021) periods in which they have occurred. Cancelled due to World War II, the first Tokyo Olympics were a phantom event; the second was held in the wake of massive protests against the US-Japan Security Treaty; and the third was postponed and hobbled by the global pandemic amid lingering fears caused by the Fukushima nuclear disaster. Each iteration of the Games has imposed physical effects on the urban landscape of Tokyo with the displacement of vulnerable and precarious persons as a consequence. Mapping the politics of demolition and displacement with the tools of hybrid spatial-sensory ethnography and using intermedial approaches, Mapping Tokyo Olympics 3.0 is a sensory archive of the lived experience of those displacements. Incorporating local knowledge and collaborative research-creation methodologies, we uncover layers of time, history and materiality to embrace contingencies and envision social futures. The sensory mapping archive becomes an archaeology of the future.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.281 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of CartographySame topicDigital Games and MediaFrench-language works237,207