MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132689788 · doi:10.17831/enq:arcc.v9i1.63

Transitional Spaces: Blurring the Line Between Interior and Exterior

2012· article· en· W2132689788 on OpenAlex
Lisa Tucker

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnquiry The ARCC Journal for Architectural Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture, Design, and Social History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterior designPlan (archaeology)Economic shortageLandscapingArchitectural engineeringSite planBayService (business)Civil engineeringEngineeringVisual artsHistoryArchaeologyBusinessArtUrban planningMarketingRegional planning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the transition spaces for homes between inside and outside designed by architects during the early twentieth century in the United States. Beginning in the late nineteenth century, the plan book became a readily available option for those wishing to build their own home in the U.S. Following a shortage of single-family houses after World War I, the design of small, single-family houses were distributed primarily through the plan book vehicle. One such plan book-producing group was the Architects' Small House Service Bureau (ASHSB). The bureau was composed entirely of registered architects and produced multiple folios of small house plans between 1914 and 1942. This paper focuses specifically on the relationship between the interior spaces and outdoors through the use of loggias, pergolas, sun porches, bay windows and other devices. The ASHSB was unique in that they promoted customization of their mass-produced house plan designs to each individual site. Thus, unlike many other plan book creators, ASHSB members determined that the relationship to the site was important to the overall design and the use of these transitional indoor/outdoor spaces, a necessity. The plans designed by ASHSB members fell into one of three sizes ” four-room, five-room or six-room plan types. The maximum number of principal rooms was six. All small house designs were presented within a rendered landscaped setting showing trees, bushes, benches and other landscaping features. At least one of the following -- porticoes, porches, dormers, bay windows, picture windows, port coheres, and sun porches”was used in every design produced by the ASHSB architect members. This work examines the range and type of spaces as well as the written recommendations and specifications that accompanied plan sets distributed by the ASHSB across the U.S and Canada during the early twentieth century.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.229
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.164 · 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