MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2591823278 · doi:10.1080/10464883.2017.1260927

Soft Futures: Mushrooms and Regenerative Design

2017· article· en· W2591823278 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Architectural Education · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and Biological Electrophysiology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFutures contractTemporalityAnthropoceneArchitectural engineeringMushroomRegenerative medicineNatural (archaeology)EngineeringEcologyBusinessBiologyHistoryArchaeologyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three recent projects fabricated from living mushroom bricks that create a visceral experience of mycelium biocomposites are described as a natural example of a “soft system.” The move toward soft, regenerative systems has important implications for the way we approach the production of architectural materials and environments in the Anthropocene. Collectively, the projects suggest a future in which dynamic materials that contribute to local ecosystems are grown rather than manufactured and engage with temporality in new and productive ways.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it