Is Sustainability Reorienting the Visual Expression of Architecture?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bien que la durabilité soit aujourd’hui devenue un impératif et un concept clef motivant les réorientations que connaissent les pratiques et théories de la conception, peu de recherches se consacrent à la compréhension de son impact sur le « design thinking » et sur la culture. Cet article enquête sur le design durable entendu comme culture visuelle émergente en architecture. Nous explorons la façon dont les concepteurs vont au-delà des normes environnementales afin de conserver dans leurs projets un équilibre créatif entre forme et contenu, entre éthique et esthétique. Nous analysons un corpus de concours organisés récemment dans les champs de l’architecture, du paysage et de l’urbanisme et avançons que les concours sont à la fois des « laboratoires » pour les concepteurs et des dispositifs épistémologiques pour les chercheurs, à même de révéler les transformations majeures des pratiques et valeurs de 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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".