Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter,like the book Surface Architecture as a whole sets forth alternate conceptions of the building's outer and enveloping surface.It shows that the architectural skin is at once acoveringand anappearance,something that encloses and to be seen.The historical period under consideration runs from the second half of the 19th to the third quarter of the 20th century.American architects are considered,as are Europeans.The works of painters are also studied,artists from Austria and France. Nevertheless,the chapter begins with the recent work of Herzog de Meuron and poses questions that are subsequently studied historically in order to deepen our understanding of contemporary conditions and possibilities.The building's surface is described in fundamentally different ways;the surface is a result ofatectonicconstruction methods,the masking of structural and spatial conditions,the symbolization of architectural origins,markings inscribed onto building materials,painterly impressions,construction processes themselves,or the products of modern industry.Despite the fact that these alternate conceptions contradict one another,the theory and practice of our time has inherited all of them.The better we understand these conceptions,the better we understand what is possible today.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.308 | 0.128 |
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".