MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990416888 · doi:10.1093/jdh/14.1.53

Ahead of Their Time: The Sears Catalogue Prefabricated Houses

2001· article· en· W1990416888 on OpenAlexaff
Anne Cooke, A. Friedman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Design History · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture and Art History Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtVisual artsArchitectural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several companies in the early 1900s offered high-quality, pre-cut and prefabricated houses in a great variety of styles. The most successful of these companies, in the years before the Second World War, was sears, Roebuck and Company. sears sold houses via mail-order catalogue and through their sales offices nearly 100,000 clients between 1908 and 1940. Despite their widespread success, however, Sears' Home Construction Division ultimately failed. The reasons for this failure can be understood in the context of their design flexibility, marketing strategy, approach to financing and the process of selling, delivering and erecting the houses. Sears' concept of packaging and shipping high-quality pre-cut materials and precise instructions directly to the client was sound. It was especially effective when combined with their ability to maintain flexibility and to offer a wide variety of designs. The company's marketing strategy was very skilful, and they were successful in convincing thousands of Americans that a Sears house would bring them the comfort and security of their dreams. Financing decisions and short-sightedness rather than poor marketing strategies or a substandard product caused the downfall in Sears' Home Construction Division. Their liberal financing policies did not take into account the possibility of economic recession nor did they allow for the reduced need for housing after 1924. Even so, their experiences in their prefabrication contributed to the current design and packaging of homes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0530.013

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.139 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations13
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Design HistorySame topicArchitecture and Art History StudiesFrench-language works237,207