Designing for sacred collective spaces in the Canadian context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper traces the changing definition of the sacred in public spaces across the major stagesof the evolution of cities, the enduring importance of sacred themes to the coherence andthe identity of cities, and means by which these themes might be pursued in contemporary,pluralistic society—in particular the Canadian context. While city building no longerparticipates in establishing the absolute orientation of the Cosmos, the physical forms continueto be defined by urban values and vice-versa. This interplay, in turn, serves to either nourishor deprive its users of experiences essential to their wellbeing. The premise of this paper isbased on building a framework that ensures that this relationship is positive and in sync withbasic human conditions, fears and desires. The application of the sacred in architecture, boththeoretical and practical, is used as the starting point and the core preoccupations are thenextrapolated to the scale of city design. In creating public spaces of both conscious and subconsciousawe, wonder and contemplation in the city, this paper calls for a revaluation of thedesign approach, the character and the shape of these spaces.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.041 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.001 |
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".