An investigation into culturally appropriate building designs for First Nations at UBC farm
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This investigation sought to evaluate different styles of Aboriginal housing design, with focus placed on designs that could be considered culturally appropriate for the Vancouver area. Ultimately, this building will be erected at the UBC Farm, and will be used as a community and activity center for Aboriginal Bands from different areas. Although this project’s scope was mainly focused on local housing styles, other Indigenous housing styles were included for background information. However, special consideration was given to Musqueam housing designs, as the UBC Farm is situated on traditional Musqueam land. Since this report serves as a cultural investigation, it focused more on broad cultural and design considerations, as opposed to specific construction techniques or measurements. Five designs were investigated: Tipi, Grass House, Plank House, Pit-House, and Wigwam. The Tipi and Grass House designs were used for background information, while a triple bottom line (Social, Economic, and Ecological) assessment was conducted for the Plank House, Pit-House, and Wigam. Special consideration was given to the social assessment, as the main focus of this paper is to determine a culturally appropriate design. This investigation suggests that the Plank House is the most culturally appropriate design for the Vancouver area. The Plank House has many design features common to different Bands in BC, and was expressly suggested by Musqueam Elder Larry Grant as the design of choice for community buildings. However, it is the most costly of the designs considered, both in terms of construction and energy loss. In contrast, the Pit- House was the next most culturally appropriate design, while being the least expensive in terms of materials. The Pit-house uses the natural insulation of soil to reduce energy loss, making it the most sustainable design considered. The Wigwam was neither the most culturally appropriate, nor the most economically feasible. This report recommends that the first building constructed at the UBC Farm should be a Plank House design, since it appears to be the most culturally appropriate. However, if there are considerations for other buildings in the future, a Pit-House design would be recommended, as it is the most economically feasible, and only slightly less culturally appropriate. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».