MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1832090041 · doi:10.56039/rgn01a02

Perspectiva y representación arquitectónica

2014· article· es· W1832090041 on OpenAlexaff
Alberto Pérez Gómez

Bibliographic record

VenueGremium · 2014
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture and Art History Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Las herramientas de representación no son nunca neutrales, al contrario, son la razón fundamental de la elaboración onceptual de los proyectos arquitectónicos y del proceso de generación de la forma. Incitados por las cambiantes tecnologías informáticas, los arquitectos contemporáneos a veces reconocen las limitaciones de las herramientas de ideación; de hecho, todavía se espera que plantas, alzados y secciones predigan con exactitud un significado intencionado tal y como aparecería ante un sujeto situado en la obra construida. De cualquier modo, hasta ahora no se ha considerado seriamente ninguna alternativa significativa para la generación de la forma al margen del dominio del moderno perspectivismo epistemológico, esto es, del entendimiento del proyecto como una “imagen.”

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGremiumSame topicArchitecture and Art History StudiesFrench-language works237,207