MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033888553

Seeking New York the stories behind the historic architecture of Manhattan - one building at a time

2015· other· en· W7033888553 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Ecology and Taxonomy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectureApartmentHoneymoonPearlFace (sociological concept)Quarter (Canadian coin)AlleyHead (geology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on the popular blog Daytonian in Manhattan, Seeking New York investigates the back stories of Manhattan's architecture and monuments. Alongside the expected account of architects, dates and styles, it reveals the human history of the buildings and statues: the scandals, the tribulations, the joys and achievements, the humanity, indeed, of the New Yorkers who lived within these walls. Meet Dorothy Parker, S.J.Perelman, Talullah Bankhead and Irving Berlin at the Algonquin Round Table; Maisie Plant, who persuaded her husband to sell his Fifth Avenue palazzo to Cartier for $100 and a pearl necklace; James and Abby Gibbons, whose Chelsea home was one of the stations on the Underground Railroad by which fugitive slaves found their way from the South to Canada. Perhaps you would rather not meet Jack the Rat, who for a dime would bite the head off a live mouse (for a quarter he'd do the same to a rat); or Ivan Poderjay, who left his bride's apartment for their honeymoon - with her body in a steamer trunk. Here the ever-changing face of Manhattan is captured through the structures and their stories

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0610.005

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant Ecology and Taxonomy StudiesFrench-language works237,207