Place, enchantment and social imaginaries: An experimental framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".