Articulation and the origins of proportion in archaic and classical Greece
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation searches for the origins of western ideas of proportion in the archaic and classical Greek conceptual terrain of articulation.We think of articulation, in the first instance, as having to do with the joining of parts to fabricate an object, such as in the physical connection of pieces of wood, cloth, metal, or stone.However, the early Greek language that described these craft processes also, and inextricably, spoke in a number of ways about what it meant for a person, thing, or the world to be beautiful, healthy, and just.Taking Homer as its primary source, Part One therefore explores archaic ideas of bodily experience (Chapter One); of crafts (Chapter Two); and of the interrelations between the two (Chapter Three).These chapters lay emphasis on how the language and concepts of articulation constructed a worldview particular to early Greece.Part Two then examines early ideas of proportion, in social and political life as depicted by Homer (Chapter Four); in classical ideas about the medicalized human body and the civic body of the polis (Chapter Five); and in the cosmogonic theories of Empedocles and Plato (Chapter Six).In so doing, I aim to demonstrate how ideas of articulation allowed for and expanded into those of proportion, binding together the ordering of bodies, of the kosmos, and of crafts, including architecture.also to my sister, Anthea, and my cousins, uncles, aunts, and grandparents, who have shared so much; and to my professors and friends at the University of Alberta and Old Scona Academic in Edmonton, for setting the bar.My colleagues in McGill's History and Theory of Architecture program have been a constant source of wisdom and amusement, and frequent partners in crime; I most often collaborated and commiserated with
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".