MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7110472143

Fort Garry Campus - Winnipeg, Manitoba

2013· dissertation· en· W7110472143 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Planning and Landscape Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)DocumentationWork (physics)Process (computing)Value (mathematics)Natural (archaeology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This body of work began as an exploration of the University of Manitoba’s Southwood Lands (a former eighteen-hole golf course), with the intention of proposing something new for the site. However, analysis and critical thinking led to the realization that there was a need to not only look at the Southwood Lands, but also the entire Fort Garry Campus. The work evolved through a process of discovery, using a variety of methods from walking the site, documentation through photography, visits to the archives to uncover history, and mapping from afar. One of the underlying objectives was to highlight the importance of taking additional time to understand a place prior to making decisions, revealing what makes a place unique, where the opportunities are, and what has been hidden over time. The idea of a site being a blank slate is dismissed, drawing on the importance of found conditions in decision making. Looking deeper into a place also leads to a greater respect for what is already there. It is what we already have that is so often discarded, and seen as having no value in decision making (the natural areas in a city or the trees on a former golf course for example). It is also the ecosystems that are seen as scrubby and unkept that are the most complex systems and richest spaces for life. Once complex, biologically rich systems are erased there is no going back to them. It is the existing conditions that are worth taking the extra time to investigate, a process that must occur prior to making design decisions that seek to remove or make new. It is only though looking, and looking carefully with un-objective eyes, and an open mind, that design can truly enhance what we already have. This practicum works under the premise that landscape has value in its own right. The landscape is not empty space, not just a place to put buildings, not a luxury that can easily be cut from budgets, and certainly not something that can be considered an afterthought. Instead, landscape is valued as something which is working and active, an essential part of life on this planet that is becoming increasingly important with a rapidly changing climate. The intellectual foundation for organizing ideas around approaching the site have been interpreted from Christophe Girot’s ‘Four Trace Concepts in Landscape Architecture’. They are in this order: landing, grounding, finding, and founding. While Girot’s four trace concepts organize ideas around approaching the site, there are three underlying principles that guide the entire body of work: 1. Landscape as infrastructure and organizing system; 2. Design as a process of discovery; 3. Investigation through multiple scales of inquiry. A strategy for the Fort Garry Campus is where this work concludes, followed by reflections on the importance of context in design and the lessons learned throughout the practicum process.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.170 · 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