Bibliographic record
Abstract
Architects are involved in only a small percentage of all built projects and are becoming marginalized in the huge home-building industry where other professions are moving in to profit from the need for affordable housing. The vast majority of homebuyers today view housing as a commodity and are unwilling to spend more on an architect-designed house. Architects must expand the market for their services to include a far greater percentage of new buildings. It is my contention that the new place for architects is in the design of speculative housing as expert consultant to the developer. The practice of architecture must change emphasis to consider more social and economic concerns. The attitudes and skills currently being taught in architecture schools must change to reflect the new needs of the profession. Architects must be taught behavioral psychology, demographics, and building economics to enable them to apply their knowledge to the market, thereby rendering the architect’s services indispensable to developers and the housing industry. Architectural education must play a key role in redefining the scope of the profession.
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 | 0.023 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".