MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033609296

The science and affect of atmosphere in landscape architecture

2017· dissertation· en· W7033609296 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Materials Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtmosphere (unit)Context (archaeology)TaigaScale (ratio)BorealMeaning (existential)Natural (archaeology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atmosphere carries multi-faceted meaning when considered in the context of spatial design. In an architectural sense, we may speak of atmosphere as a spatial quality or in the way the built or natural environment is capable of moving us emotionally. Yet, when considered in a scientific register, atmosphere may be described as a complex of observable and measurable energies, which give air substance, behavior and force. The practice of landscape architecture entails a heightened awareness of exposure, namely the exposure to meteorological processes that in turn shape much of our perceptual and haptic experience of the ‘outside’ world. The intent of this practicum will be to draw attention to the importance of both designations of atmosphere, particularly within the discipline of landscape architecture, and set within the context of phenomenology. The context of this work begins at the scale of the circumpolar boreal forest and examines a particular biological and chemical phenomenon that occurs between the atmosphere and the boreal forest biome. The scale of focus will be drawn to a site at the southern transition zone between the boreal forest and St. Lawrence mixed forest within the Temagami region of northeast Ontario, Canada. Here, the phenomenon in question is quite palpable.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicCultural Heritage Materials AnalysisFrench-language works237,207