L'Eclipse De L'Objet Dans Les ThéOries Du Projet En Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The contextual field of this research is the history of ideas in design, ‘ideas’ being understood as ideologies, dogmas, treatises, theories or philosophies (i.e. both descriptive and normative items), and ‘design’ including all practices related to our built environment with some aesthetic concern (graphic, product, architectural, urban, landscape design). Our corpus is constituted from written and published texts mainly but not exclusively from the second half of the last century. The objective of the research was to find out if some Gestalt or model (evolutionary, structural, thematic or else) emerged from this historical corpus and the purpose was essentially pedagogical and didactic. The research yielded the following interesting features: (1) the material object or product has long been the main focus of the theories, all the way up to the middle of the twentieth century; (2) the object tends to disappear from the concerns of the theoreticians after the Second World War, both upstream and downstream of the design process, i.e. on the side of the designers and on the side of the users - design theories mainly focus upstream on the design process and downstream on the functions of the product; (3) much more recently another shift took place away from the product in the preoccupations of the theoreticians, both upstream and downstream again. Theoretical models are now interested in either the actors of the design process or the experiences of the user as a ‘whole’ human being.These shifts correspond to a displacement of the centre of the interest respectively from the aesthetic to the logical, to the ethical fields of philosophy. This ‘eclipse of the object’ has important consequences for the theory and practice of design.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.052 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.023 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".