MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408283267 · doi:10.15302/j-laf-1-050062

Auto-Ethnography: Connecting to the Nearby

2024· article· en· W4408283267 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLandscape Architecture Frontiers · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTourism, Volunteerism, and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnographySociologyCommunicationGeographyHistoryAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This project delves into the establishment of place attachment in evolving landscapes through an interdisciplinary lens. It starts with the interpretation of the story of A-Fei, a mushroom forager in Yunnan, China from the perspective of multispecies ethnography, revealing that place attachment is tied to the nearby, where everyday interactions with the surrounding landscape can evoke memories of hometown and generate meanings of a new residence. Extending these insights, this project adopts auto-ethnography to examine the author’s experiences in the multicultural city of Toronto to explore how she as an immigrant builds an attachment to the local landscape. Through sensory engagement, cultural observation, and interviews of the other immigrants, how magnolias facilitate a new sense of belongings has been found. This project aims to transcend disciplinary boundaries and expand the realm of landscape architecture to anthropologic perspectives. By emphasizing the co-evolution of human and non-human lifeways, it seeks to explore how individuals perceive landscape and build relationship with it and proposes “ethnographizing landscape architecture” as a value-centered approach for socially impactful and contextually relevant design.

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)0.002
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLandscape Architecture FrontiersSame topicTourism, Volunteerism, and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207