Transformable structures: Materialising design for change
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
Living in an age of rapid changes, designers are challenged to create solutions that remain sustainable in a continuously evolving environment.Since most of our earth's resources are finite, these solutions should incorporate efficient material use and reuse.Buildings and structures are always in transition.Facilitating these transformations is vital to the sustainable development of our built environment.With our group we study, develop and assess transformable structures on different scales, in different contexts and for various time-spans and purposes.This paper presents our work on transformable structures, based on four case studies: a kinetic curved-line folding component, a temporary and rapidly assembled structure, a dynamic wall assembly and a BIM tool for material flow assessment of adaptable buildings.Although varying in scale or purpose, these cases demonstrate the same key principles of transformability.Reducing the complexity of the connections and structural system facilitates an easy and rapid assembly, but also allows users and locals to participate in the assembly, maintenance, reconfiguration and deconstruction of the structure.Apart from benefits during the assembly and adaptability, it is important to assess transformable structures and building solutions on their material and cost effectiveness.With BIM tools it is possible to incorporate this assessment already in the conceptual design phases of a project, as illustrated in the fourth case.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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