MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095558052 · doi:10.2495/dne-v8-n1-29-40

Harmonization between architecture and nature through traditional japanese screens

2013· article· en· W2095558052 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
E. Beita, Ataru FUJII

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban and spatial planning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmonizationArchitectureArchitectural engineeringMeaning (existential)Space (punctuation)AdaptabilityComputer scienceControl (management)Systems engineeringSoftware engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceGeographyEpistemologyAestheticsEcologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Harmonization between architecture and nature is one principle deeply rooted in traditional Japanese architecture, infl uencing all aspects of space creation. Buildings are not seen as individual objects, but as part of the existing environment, resulting in the development of design principles which enhance these qualities. Although there are many components in traditional architecture which promote these principles, one of the most important ones is boundaries. Through the precise control of boundaries, a space can be given a new meaning and even perceived in a new manner. Traditional screen systems known in Japanese as 'shoji' give spaces the fl exibility needed to adapt to a changing environment, given the inhabitants control of views, illumination and ventilation. This adaptability of traditional spaces has been studied through a case study of a single tea room, which was then simulated through 3D modelling software, permitting the analysis of the space during different times and seasons. The results highlight the important design principles used to improve the interaction of spaces, while showing possible applications in urban spaces in the creation of adaptable screen systems suited towards a constantly changing environment.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 spread0.214 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and EcodynamicsSame topicUrban and spatial planningFrench-language works237,207