Recovering history: Philip Morton Shand and the mission of modernism

Within the context of Modern architectural history the position of Philip Morton Shand (1888 - 1960) as a key figure in its dissemination has been historically understated. Although not a designer, his role as architectural critic and writer in conjunction with the breadth of his international contacts enabled him to bridge a gap between continental Europe and England. His contributions to the major English architectural journals (i.e. Architect's Journal, Architectural Review and the Architectural Association Journal) between the late 1920s and early 1950s, in addition to his travels, language skills and his involvement in the CIAM and the MARS Group, facilitated the dissemination of ideas to the English-speaking population. Beyond his architectural writings, Shand was also a connoisseur of wine and food and published seminal texts on the topics. However, despite his significant literary contributions, a biography of Shand has not yet been written. An investigation into Shand's life and activities, particularly during the interwar years, will hopefully illuminate the magnitude of his involvement in the architectural scene and its effects on the dissemination of Modern architectural history

The mean betweenness centrality of the four networks and estimation methods.

<p>The mean betweenness centrality of the four networks and estimation methods.</p

Betweenness centrality of left (L) and right (R) hemisphere ROIs in pairwise correlation (red) and partial correlation (blue) networks with 68 ROIs, averaged over participants.

<p>Betweenness centrality of left (L) and right (R) hemisphere ROIs in pairwise correlation (red) and partial correlation (blue) networks with 68 ROIs, averaged over participants.</p

Overlap between networks at different numbers of volumes (i.e., time-series lengths).

<p>Shown is the proportion of identical edges present in two respective networks. Black lines −− show overlap between the pairwise correlation network and the partial correlation network of a participant, based on a given number of volumes (i.e., time-series length). Separate lines for each participant (numbered 1 − 5). Red (or blue) lines indicate overlap between the pairwise correlation (red) (or partial correlation (blue)) network based on the full time-series of 240 volumes and the pairwise correlation (red) (or partial correlation (blue)) network based on smaller numbers of volumes (i.e., shorter time-series length.</p

Overview of TPR and of 1 − <i>f</i>(FPR) for shrinkage (blue), ridge (orange), and lasso (green) estimated partial correlations, and for pairwise correlations (red), averaged over all three selection criteria (i.e., correct number of edges, 20% less edges, and 20% more edges).

<p><i>f</i>(FPR) = exp(−10²*FPR); <i>n</i> = Number of observations.</p

Illustration of pairwise vs partial correlation networks.

<p>Thicker edges represent stronger absolute correlations. Left: true network of partial correlations (blue), with 8 connections, no triangles. Middle: associated pairwise correlation network, with erroneous direct connections (red) that form 84 triangles. Right: pruned network of 8 strongest pairwise correlations, with two isolated nodes (yellow) and two erroneous connections (red) that form 2 triangles (2-3-8 and 3-7-8). Comparing the true partial correlation network on the left with the pruned pairwise correlation network on the right, which consists of the same number of edges as the underlying network, three differences stand out. Firstly, indirect connections may appear as direct connections (i.e., nodes 2–8 and nodes 3–7). This results in an excessive number of triangles, affecting network measures such as small-worldness. Secondly, while the true network is connected (i.e., there exists a path between each pair of nodes), pruned pairwise correlation networks tend to consist of isolated (groups of) nodes (i.e., nodes 1 and 9). Thirdly, the number of connections of a node may differ from the true number of connections (e.g., node 3 has four instead of three edges). In larger networks, hub nodes may emerge erroneously.</p

The true positive rate for the four networks and estimation methods.

<p>The true positive rate for the four networks and estimation methods.</p

The number of components (upper) and the size of the largest component (lower) obtained for the four networks and estimation methods.

<p>The number of components (upper) and the size of the largest component (lower) obtained for the four networks and estimation methods.</p

Local transitivity of left (L) and right (R) hemisphere ROIs in pairwise correlation (red) and partial correlation (blue) networks with 68 ROIs, averaged over participants.

<p>Local transitivity of left (L) and right (R) hemisphere ROIs in pairwise correlation (red) and partial correlation (blue) networks with 68 ROIs, averaged over participants.</p

Exemplary network with path from node 1 to 5, showing partial covariances <i>γ</i>_<i>ij</i>.

<p>Exemplary network with path from node 1 to 5, showing partial covariances <i>γ</i>_<i>ij</i>.</p