The Header House - Integrated Project Dossier (2017)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Header House is designated as Recognized Federal Heritage Building for its historical and architectural values. Header house is historically valuable for its association with the Ottawa beautification movement. The former potting house is an excellent example of the role Public Works had in creating Laurier’s “Washington of the North”. Major’s Hill Park, where Header House is located, was Ottawa’s first municipal park during this movement. This vision was to have an attractive governmental city, with every aspect being aesthetically pleasing (even the potting house). It is representative of the greenhouses and support facilities that were needed for park development, which were also designed and erected to enhance the attractiveness of the park while having a functional use. The Header House is architecturally valuable for its good aesthetic design, functional design and good craftsmanship and materials. It is picturesque and modestly scaled with details reinforcing the forms that express these values. The use of brick walls for the interior and limestone for the exterior ensured cool temperatures and cool conditions needed for potting. All the materials are of good quality and representative of the quality craftsmanship used to construct the Header House. This can be seen in the way the irregularly coursed, rough-cut limestone, corner quoins and plain dressed canter band are used collectively on the walls of the house. The unevenness of the stone walls reflects the aesthetic and functional qualities of the Header House. These materials were also used to ensure the longevity of the design. 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 2017.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.167 | 0.074 |
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".