Bibliographic record
Abstract
The high-rise architecture and the twentieth century are synonymous since the high-rise building is one of the landmarks of our modern society. It has been related to designing of high-rise buildings in capitalism which has been particularly significant as symbols of power and prestige based on the architectural and structural expression of buildings. This situation has been relevant to a residential development where high-rise living style is simply a necessity to meet quantitative market demands. The residential style in Seoul has been changed rapidly from low-rise to high-rise during the last several decades in influenced of the modern industrial society. This social pattern has led to excessive rural-to-urban migration on limited land resources and it inevitably resulted multi-story residence development to accomodate the fast increase of the city with large immigrated population since 1960's. The habitat called apartment has become typical living quarter of city life based on modern society with globalization and rapid westernization in life style. The high-rise living style will continue to evolve in response to new developments in our choice of lifestyles according to a social situation. This paper has focused on the analysis of high-rise residential buildings to understand architectural characteristics of high-rise residential designing with the changes of the times in Seoul. Therefore, it will be a chance to observe a variation of an architectural design pattern for high-rise residential buildings in relation to the changes of the social and cultural situations based on case studies and to understand the meaning of vertical design in high-rise building planning by in-depth observation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".