Preserving old buildings : adaptive use for residential purposes in Montreal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the late 1970s many empty buildings in Montreal have been adapted for residential purposes. The main focus of this thesis is to document and analyse the most representative examples of these projects in order to define the nature and results of the adaptive-use practice in Montreal. Due to complexity of the field, the framework for analysis must be flexible enough to apply to different contexts and building types, yet firm enough to solve the perpetual dilemmas intrinsic to adaptive-use design. The attitude of this research is that the best way to do this is to learn from architectural, social, and political history---indeed how these types of histories interrelate to form a continuum of popular and professional opinion. The study starts the examination of the main preservationist and adaptive-use methods with the discussion of preservationist terminology and origins of preservationist theories in Europe. It traces them as they come to North America, examines the roots of adaptive use for residential purposes in Manhattan, and follows the phenomenon as it has appeared in Montreal from the sixties to present. After tracking preservation theory and practice until this point, the parameters for determining what is a successful adaptive-use project become clearer. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".