Building on the past, looking to the future: design history in the Twenty First Century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past forty years the history of design has grown out of all recognition as a serious field of academic study, research and scholarship. Interest in the discipline has also seen considerable development globally over the period although, more recently, this has perhaps accelerated as a result a number of international initiatives, beginning with an international conference at the University of Barcelona in 1999. Entitled ‘Historiar desde la periferia: historia e historias del diseno’, the conference sought to develop the profile of the subject in the Spanish-speaking world. The proceedings were published in the following year in which a follow-up conference was held in Havana, Cuba. After this, the idea of dissemination developed further with the holding of a third conference on design history and design studies in Istanbul in 2002, entitled ‘Mind the Map: Design History beyond Boundaries’ with a fourth planned in Guadalajara, Mexico, in 2004. The increasingly ambitious agenda could be seen in the Mind the Map conference which comprised thirteen strands as well as a workshop on ‘ID in the Periphery: Historical Development Patterns of Industrial Design in Newly Industrializing Countries’. In one strand alone, ‘Design History Narratives: From Local to Global’ there were contributions from Britain, Canada, Estonia, Ireland, Mexico, Spain, Turkey, Singapore and the United States. The significance of the inauguration of Design History Workshop Japan in November 2002, further disseminating research, pedagogy and publication in the discipline in another key geographical and linguistic arena, marks another important milestone in its dissemination and academic development.
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 | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.056 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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".