225 Bruyère House - Integrated Project Dossier (2015)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While the structure isn’t as complex architecture-wise in comparison to other homes, it holds value in regards to Ottawa’s true heritage and origins. 225 Bruyère is located in one of Ottawa’s initial neighbourhoods, and the main reason why it is an interest for historic assessment is due to its capability to physically provide an insight of the city’s ‘working class’ past and heritage. The residence mainly exhibits a vernacular architectural style, where the basic need for housing surpassed the luxury of design, thus the significance of the home is a focus on heritage over architecture. 225 Bruyère is a prime example of how the lower-class immigrants in the 1800s lived; a topic that is not often mentioned or discussed in heritage conservation. With the home being over 150 years and sustaining most of its original features, this type of construction and architectural style is no longer attained and is very unique in terms of historic preservation; it serves as part of Ottawa’s cultural significance that future generations can view as an example of how their immigrant ancestors settled and underwent adversities to achieve a better life. As 225 Bruyère is based on a vernacular architecture with slight influences of a worker’s cottage. There are not many ornamental features serving as character-defining elements, yet it still stands as a noteworthy structure with very few of its kind remaining. This is the Integrated Project Dossier compiled by a group of undergraduate students of the Architectural Conservation and Sustainability Program (Engineers and architects) at Carleton University for the CIVE3207 (ARCN4100) Historic Site Recording and Assessment course in 2015.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.122 | 0.026 |
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".