Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Europe, immersive technologies have seen limited application at historically contested sites. Meanwhile, despite the significant impact of the German Occupation of Greece (1941-1944) on public debates and its inspiration for artistic displays and performances, many World War II memory sites in Greece remain largely invisible. This paper presents the “Block 15” project, an innovative initiative hosted by the Athens University of Economics and Business (AUEB) and co-funded by the Greek-German Fund for the Future and the Hellenic Ministry of Culture (https://block15.aueb.gr/wp/). The project focuses on the historical significance of the Chaidari concentration camp in Athens during the German occupation of Greece (1941-1944). By utilizing virtual reality (VR) technology for the first time in Greece to present first-person testimonies from survivors at a site of 'difficult heritage,' this paper aims to explore how digital testimonies can reshape historical understanding and educational practices regarding the Holocaust. The use of VR in the “Block 15” project provides an innovative approach to historical education by immersing users in the testimonies of survivors. This paper argues that VR can preserve the dynamism of survivor narratives, preventing them from becoming static representations that lose their emotional resonance. By actively involving users in the narrative, VR helps maintain the fluidity of memory while addressing the risks of oversimplification or misrepresentation. Through the exploration of these goals and arguments, this paper aspires to contribute to the evolving discourse on digital testimony and its implications for Holocaust and genocide education. This paper also seeks to investigate how VR technology can enhance the pedagogical value of first-person testimonies, facilitating a deeper emotional and cognitive engagement with historical narratives. By offering insights into the integration of VR technology in educational settings, we aim to ensure that the histories of Chaidari’s survivors are preserved and resonate with future generations. Ultimately, this project seeks to illuminate the broader implications of trauma and memory, fostering critical reflections on how the past continues to influence the present.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.059 | 0.005 |
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.
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".