Researching Inhabitant Agency in Interactive Architecture
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of Interactive Architecture (IA) spans over several decades and appears to be gaining increasing momentum in recent years. Yet, inhabitant-centered approaches towards research and design in the field still have a long way ahead to explore. Particularly, we observed that the examination of IAÂs social relevance in literature is still incipient and ill supported by evidence. The study discussed in this paper is attempting to remediate this gap by exploring one of the first socio-political arguments around the relevance of IA, namely inhabitant empowerment and agency. It investigates whether an inhabitantÂs relation and experience with interactive spaces, conceived according to different interaction strategies, increases the participants perception of their own agency in the space. In this paper, we briefly explain the prototyping of an interactive space-plan designed to emulate the behavior of four basic models of interaction. Finally, the paper presents an experimental study set to test inhabitant agency in IA. It concludes that IA has the potential to increase inhabitant agency, but that this is very dependable on the systemÂs design regarding behavior and interaction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it