MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606817542 · doi:10.1017/s1359135515000196

This is not a mountain!: simulation, imitation, and representation in the Mountain Dwellings project, Copenhagen

2015· article· en· W2606817542 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueArchitectural Research Quarterly · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicArchitecture and Computational Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFacadeGeographyRainwater harvestingParliamentEnvironmental planningArchitectural engineeringUrban planningQuarter (Canadian coin)ArchitectureCivil engineeringEngineeringArchaeologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Mountain Dwellings project, located in the centre of the Ørestad district of southern Copenhagen, was built in 2008 by Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG). Together with BIG’s other housing projects nearby, namely the VM Houses and the 8 House, the building is a part of the urban development carried out under the ‘Ørestad act’, initiated by the Danish Parliament in the 1990s. This promoted the development of a new contemporary urban quarter of dwelling, studying, and working. With an attempt to reinforce the vibrant urban fabric of the district, various buildings of residential units and public spaces have been built, in addition to the improved green areas and rainwater canals.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.589

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.261 · 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