The integral building-landscape : developing a language of integration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis looks at the problem of disconnection between buildings and landscape and attempts to examine the notion of integration with the goal of developing a set of principles for integrating building and landscape. The work begins by examining characteristics of building and landscape as well as attitudes towards nature, which may provide some initial indication of connectedness. From there, the term integration is examined and a foundation for a potential integrated building/landscape relationship is laid out. Next, selected historical precedents are reviewed in order to construct a background of integrated relationships. These precedents are furthermore used to begin to create a list of case studies for developing a language of integration. The historical review includes both "high" architecture demonstrating integration through spiritual connections and search for a topos, as well as vernacular buildings and their integrative approach to construction, of necessity. The integration language itself is developed through two parallel methodologies. It begins with a set of case studies examined for their formal/physical qualities of integration and how they are demonstrating integration. These case studies are categorized in a taxonomic fashion based on their kind/form of integration. The result of the case studies analyses is a final grouping of integration ideas based on observation, (positive analysis) Secondly, a number of issues are used to extract opinions from a set of reviewed literature of many different designers and theorists, and compared to illustrate commonalities between opinions. It arrives at another set of condensed integration ideas based on opinions from literature, which are considered experientially important for the building/landscape relationship, (normative analysis) The integration ideas from literature are then compared with the formally observed ideas from the case studies to inform the construction of a combined set of integration principles. These principles are then 'test driven' with the Jericho Sailing Centre in order to work with the them and make any revisions. A final language of integration principles is then established. The final language consists of a set of prerequisites and 14 physical design principles, concerned with situating of buildings, building form, and detailing of the relationship between building envelope and landscape space which will help to integrate building and landscape. The final language is intended to act as a design tool or as a way of analyzing existing projects. Further research would involve application of these principles at different densities and at different scales of urban design, as well as comparison with sustainability criteria.
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 | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.025 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".