Bibliographic record
Abstract
Culminating during the first half of the twentieth century, the modern movement in architecture can be described as the relinquishing of classical upbringings and a preoccupation with rational design solutions. The period occurring directly after the modern movement is generally referred to as the post-modern era and is arguably the era in which we currently live. Questioning the constructs that shaped the modern movement, architects of the post-modern age have characteristically placed greater attention to the specifics of site and location. For perhaps the first time in history, significant interest has been put into the impact of the building on the individual, the environment and on society. Post-modern architecture attempts to reestablish a link with the past, while approaching the emotional complexity of the times with an eclecticism that continues to produce great works of individuality. This paper will examine two buildings which clearly exemplify the characteristics of each of the aforementioned stylistic periods. Taking place during the transition period between modern and post-modern thought was the 1967 World’s Fair in Montreal. ‘Expo ‘67 ’ as it was named, presented a platform from which “nations could display their aspirations, characteristics and achievements”.1 In clear parallel to the architectural direction of the time, Expo was conceived as a showcase of diversity and innovation. Architect Jean Faugeron’s French Pavilion at Expo ’67 is a poignant example of mid twentieth century modern aesthetics.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.006 |
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".