MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6885051183 · doi:10.13140/rg.2.2.19580.76163

Place, enchantment and social imaginaries: An experimental framework

2024· article· en· W6885051183 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueORBi (University of Liège) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLandscape and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Context (archaeology)Focus (optics)Key (lock)Field (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawing from a recent doctoral research at the junction of architecture and sociology (Kunysz 2024), this presentation discusses the experimental theoretical framework that was built to investigate the transformations of two abandoned spaces’ social imaginaries ; Bavière Hospital (Liège, Belgium) and the Champ des Possibles railyard (Montréal, Québec). This presentation first showcases the interconnections between three important but historically distinct conceptual schools: Place Studies, as established within humanistic geography (Tuan 1979), anthropology of enchantment (Winkin 2023) and social imaginary as explored within political philosophy (Castoriadis 1975). We then explore how those three approaches can contribute to each other within a joint framework of theorization of places of attachment‘s social imaginaries. In particular, a focus is given to the operationalization of Castoridadis’s social imaginary at the service of ethnographical study and to the repoliticization of Winkin’s enchantment. The presentation ends on some empirical findings resulting from the application of this framework and observations on the need for further scrutinity within Castoriadis’ conception of imaginary and creation within our transaesthetic age (Serroy, Lipovetski 2013) and the development of artistic and expressive research practises.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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 venueORBi (University of Liège)Same topicLandscape and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207