Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Contemporary debates in architectural criticism often turn on the identification of a building's proper function.Thus a key step in resolving such debates would be to understand how buildings come to have their proper functions.In this essay, I argue that buildings, like other artefacts, obtain their proper functions, not in virtue of architects' intentions, but in virtue of their histories of selection in the marketplace.I show how this theory of architectural function can advance critical debates by discussing the case of Libeskind's controversial addition to Toronto's Royal Ontario Museum. Fact and Function in Architectural Criticism1. What are we building here?According to Vitruvius, successful works of architecture are supposed to possess three virtues: durability, convenience and beauty. 1 Of these, one might expect the last, beauty, to be the most difficult to apply, and so to be the focus of disputes in architectural criticism.Beauty, after all, is widely believed to be "in the eye of the beholder," and many different judgments about whether something is beautiful cannot be resolved through empirical study or rational debate.Whether something is durable, in contrast, seems to be clearly a matter of fact; something that can be assessed empirically, for example, by measuring the ability of a structure to withstand stress or not to deteriorate when exposed to the elements.Convenience-which today we might call "utility"-is more complex, but seems similarly based in fact.For example, to assess the utility of a hospital we could measure the speed with which personnel and supplies may be moved through it.For these reasons, we might well expect beauty to be the real sticking point of disputes within architectural criticism.However, many interesting cases in contemporary architectural criticism seem not to meet this expectation.Here it is the issue of utility, or functionality, that has emerged as the nub of some important disagreements, though not in quite the way one might expect. 2Consider, as an example, Daniel Libeskind's 2007 extension of Toronto's Royal Ontario Museum (ROM).Libeskind's construction, now known (after one of its philanthropic patrons) as the Lee-Chin Crystal, was a renovation of the entrance to the previously existing museum complex.A dramatic structure composed of sloping walls that meet at sharp angles, the Crystal appears to
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».