MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410286613 · doi:10.1080/10464883.2025.2463299

Seven Hundred Thousand Adobe Blocks

2025· article· en· W4410286613 on OpenAlexaff
Zachary Colbert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Architectural Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLanguage, Linguistics, Cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdobeComputer graphics (images)Computer scienceEngineeringArchitectural engineeringEngineering drawingArchaeologyVisual artsArtHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay examines adobe block-making at the Poston concentration camps in Arizona, where Japanese Americans were forcibly incarcerated during World War II. Focusing on the spatial, material and social dimensions of adobe construction by incarcerated laborers, the text reveals how the use of local earth and diverted water from the Colorado River Indian Reservation reflects not only the extractive and carceral forces of imperialism, but also a form of resistance rooted in the landscape itself. At Poston, adobe block-making became a site of collective agency within the oppressive legacies governed by the Law of the River, which continues to dictate water rights and resource distribution across the southwestern US. The essay views architecture as a political act, considering adobe block-making as both a response to and a rejection of extraction-based design frameworks. By grounding built forms in the land and fostering solidarity among laborers, the adobe blocks challenge dominant architectural practices toward a reimagined relationship with the land—one based on reciprocity, ecological stewardship and an architecture beyond extraction—that counters the global imperial frameworks driving resource commodification and hegemonic power today.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0730.009

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 head0.265
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Architectural EducationSame topicLanguage, Linguistics, Cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207