MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2210698333 · doi:10.1260/1478-0771.13.3-4.237

Hybrid Representation: Intaglio Etching of Digital Models

2015· article· en· W2210698333 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Architectural Computing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicArchitecture and Computational Design
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentation (politics)StudioComputer graphics (images)Computer scienceSoftwareEngineering drawingSet (abstract data type)Modular designArchitectureComputer architectureProgramming languageEngineeringVisual artsArtTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores an alternative approach to architectural representation by using computation and digital modeling to develop novel modes of drawing. The project was initiated for the International Architecture Biennale Rotterdam (IABR 2014) and was exhibited in the seminal Kunsthal Rotterdam in the summer of 2014. The project, entitled Weerkas, was a set of twelve intaglio etchings. A combination of digital modeling programs such as Rhino, Grasshopper and 3D Studio Max and drafting software AutoCAD were used to develop the drawings. The digital files were photo-transferred and etched using a polymer intaglio plate. The analog/digital hybrid explores the limitations of such a combined means of expression and its possible significance in developing a two from three-dimensional drawing technique.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.238 · 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