A noble house in the city, domestic architecture as elite signification in late 19th century Hamilton
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis is an investigation of a social elite in Hamilton, Ontario, at the end of the nineteenth-century and its use of architectural form to enforce the social order. The homes of this elite were physically connected by a linear grid of streets, and psychologically connected by a strong social network of women. The linear and temporal progression from public street to private inner space strengthened and enforced the structure of this elite and also helped to define the elite character and form of the neighbourhood. The development of this urban area has been studied through an analysis of the structure of the elite, the architectural form and symbolism of their houses, and the relationship of both to the form and character of the social structure that was in place at the end of the nineteenth century. Domestic architecture, social structure, and urban form are intimately connected. In Hamilton, a critical mass of similarly defined individuals occupying visually distinctive homes was necessary to maintain not only the social hierarchy but also the status of the neighbourhood as elite. An elite group also requires the presence of dominating personalities. The relationship of Adam Brown, William Hendrie, and W. E. Sanford, and their importance to the maintenance of the elite through the location and form of their residences has been shown. The importance of women for the maintenance of Hamilton's elite society through teas, calls, and philanthropy and the relationship of these social events to interior house form is discussed. Visual sources, such as Bird's-Eye Views, contemporary maps, architectural plans, and contemporary photographs, used in conjunction with written material, such as diaries and other personal papers, have proven invaluable.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".