MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Designing Coordinated Separates: Use of Inspirational Sources in Apparel Classes

2016· report· en· W2747021899 on OpenAlexaff
Sandra Tullio-Pow, Glynis Dupuis, Paulette Kelly, Megan Strickfaden

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCrafts, Textile, and Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClothingVisual artsTextilePaintingArtifact (error)Process (computing)Engineering drawingEngineeringComputer scienceArchitectural engineeringArtArtificial intelligenceHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ready-to-wear apparel design development typically begins with trend forecasting publications. Teaching students how to interpret such information and translate applicable elements is challenging. In the design assignment reported here, apparel students were introduced to the process of inspiration through the iconic collection of colour blocked knit dresses created by Yves St. Laurent (1965). Students initiated their design process with a painting and/or historical artifact from a local art gallery or museum with the aim to create women's daywear comprised of coordinating separates (jacket, pant, top). Each piece was to be made up in different, but coordinating fabrics. Use of at least one printed, embroidered or woven multi-coloured textile was mandatory. Students kept a design process journal to document their use of inspirational sources, colour, fabric and concept development. Examples of student work that highlight details incorporated on fabric surfaces, through silhouettes, proportion, balance and focal points are presented.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.121 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCrafts, Textile, and DesignFrench-language works237,207