MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145268819 · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.585

A Creative Strategy for Sustainable Design Education - A Tribute to Charles and Ray Eames

2012· article· en· W2145268819 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Martin Racine

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersUniversité de Montréal
KeywordsTributeThe artsSociologyDesign educationCultural heritageEveryday lifeArchitectural engineeringSustainable designVisual artsEngineering managementEngineering ethicsEngineeringSustainabilityArtPolitical scienceArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a project that was assigned to senior level Design students in the Department of Design and Computation Arts at Concordia University, Montreal. The objectives were to transmit advanced conceptual and creative skills while bringing students to integrate fundamental sustainable design principles. The challenge suggested was to create a base for the structure of recuperated chairs designed by Charles and Ray Eames in the 1950's. This project stimulated students to deeply engage in the development of high quality designs and creative concepts while encouraging them to understand the importance of preserving the environment and the cultural heritage related to objects that are much too often discarded after the end of their useful life. This project was inspired by Metacycle, a design research that aims to prolong the lifespan of everyday objects (metacycle.ca).

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.029
Scholarly communication0.0130.010
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia - Social and Behavioral SciencesSame topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207