MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6945487008 · doi:10.25316/ir-17632

Heritage conservation planning in Saint John, New Brunswick: The importance of heritage conservation and looking to a future with social justice

2022· dissertation· en· W6945487008 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueVIUSpace (Vancouver Island University Library) · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCassava research and cyanide
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndustrial heritageCultural heritageCultural heritage managementValuesGovernment (linguistics)MulticulturalismIdentity (music)Narrative

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada has a long history of Heritage conservation across all levels of government and through the use of many different tools. Canada is also a multicultural diverse nation, but often it has focused on one dominant narrative in heritage, often centered on the affluent and rich or colonial powers. Heritage is not just built aesthetic style, but the intangible evolution of our relationships with space. Heritage is part of our identity and fosters a sense of community; without the full story we are lesser. We need to ask ourselves, who and how is heritage designated in our system, whose heritage has this conserved, and as we move forward, how can we bring a social justice lens to our planning. Using a case study of Saint John, New Brunswick, the oldest incorporated city in Canada with a large amount of conserved heritage, we can start to see who has been involved in designating and conserving heritage. Interviews with people involved will also help to bring into focus perceptions of who decides what is heritage worthy and how they think we could improve heritage planning. We are trying to improve our planning system so that in the future, our heritage conservation better reflects our diversity as Canadians.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.901
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.210
Teacher spread0.200 · 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.

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVIUSpace (Vancouver Island University Library)Same topicCassava research and cyanideFrench-language works237,207