Bibliographic record
Abstract
The idea for this special issue was born during the Imperfect Modernism conference in a discussion with the guest editors Liutauras Nekrošius and Kateryna Didenko. Held in Vilnius in May 2024 and organized by the guest editors of this special issue, the conference brought together scholars, architects, and experts in heritage preservation from Canada, Cyprus, Eritrea, Georgia, Germany, Israel, Kosovo, Lebanon, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, and Ukraine. A wide range of issues was discussed, highlighting the uniqueness of regional adaptations in conservation, restoration, and adaptive reuse of buildings, sites and neighborhoods of the Modern Movement shaped by each country’s political, economic, and socio-cultural factors, while also revealing shared patterns.Turning to the discussion on the concept of Modernism, it is worth noting that different manifestations and perceptions of modernist heritage have evolved throughout the 20th and 21st centuries across diverse contexts and value systems. Scholarly debates, conservation practices, international initiatives, and local experience have shaped the concept as layered and flexible, now encompassing not only doctrinal modernist works and interpretations but a broader spectrum of modernities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".