Relaxed and Comfortable: The Australian Pavilion at Expo '67
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Expo '67, Montreal, was the first international exhibition Australia had attended since the 1939 New York World's Fair. In New York, Australia promoted its export industries in timber and wool in an annex next to the British pavilion. In Montreal, Australia contributed its own major pavilion, a simple, rectangular box of glass and steel. Inside, the pavilion contained few actual exhibits. The main feature of its spacious interior was a salon-style arrangement of two hundred and forty lounge chairs created by the Australian designers Grant and Mary Featherston from an idea by the exhibit designer Robin Boyd. Visitors sat in the chairs to activate short, taped interviews with prominent Australians on aspects of Australian life and achievement, delivered though stereophonic speakers in the chairs' headrests. Occasional tables stood nearby, bearing books on Australian society and ashtrays of a modern Australian design. One wall of the main exhibition hall featured a row of modernist paintings by leading Australian artists. Natural light streamed into the pavilion through its glazed north and south faces, which provided sweeping views across the exhibition site. Quality Australian wool carpet covered the pavilion's floors and some internal walls, muffling incoming noise and adding to the general feeling of repose.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
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".