Home Pages: Domesticity and Duplicity in Images of Architecture for Ageing*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores images of long-term care institutions on contemporary websites as contexts for understanding age as "a sweep of delimited time."In particular, it considers how and why good institutions are described as inviting, cozy, intimate, and above all home-like, while other facilities are criticized for being exactly the opposite: uncomfortable, unhome-like and above all, "institutional."By studying the imagery and architecture of longterm care we illuminate important tensions between representations and place; and between home and institution.We explain how an emphasis on homelike dcor camouflages the functioning of highly complex and highly regulated institutions.Cet article prend pour point de dpart des images d'tablissements de soins de longue dure, diffuses sur des sites web rcents, afin de mettre en vidence l'ge en tant que priode dfinie .En particulier, nous examinons comment et pourquoi les tablissements de soins de longue dure sont jugs satisfaisants lorsqu'ils sont dits accueillants, intimes et domestiques. l'inverse, d'autres tablissements sont critiqus en raison de leur caractre institutionnel.En
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".