Laboratorio de etología arquitectónica: desde la estética evolutiva de la arquitectura
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
Presento una doble innovación docente en el contenido y también en su metodología.Un experimento ensayado en el contexto del Senior Research Studio in Architecture de la Universidad de Calgary durante el curso 2016-17 cuyo marco teórico, la estética evolutiva de la arquitectura, considera a la arquitectura un comportamiento característico de la etología humana. Tras la ocupación y balizado in situ de un emplazamiento periurbano, los estudiantes desarrollan sus proyectos en tres niveles, el individual (una vivienda con taller)el grupal (de los recintos delimitados en la ocupación) y el proyecto colectivo de un barrio funcional. La presentación de resultados provisionales (iteraciones) cada pocas semanas permite comprobar en una maqueta de trabajo del emplazamiento, cómo afloran las emociones arquitectónicas básicas de la especie humana a medida que se articulan los intereses individuales con los de grupo, y los de cada grupo con los de curso. I here introduce a double teaching innovation, in its content and also in its methodology. An experiment rehearsed in the context of the Senior Research Studio in Architecture at the University of Calgary during the 2016-17 academic year, whose theoretical framework, the Evolutionary Aesthetics of Architecture, considers that architecture is a typical behavior of the human ethology. After the claim of a periurban site, the students develop their designs in three nested levels. The individual level (a dwelling with a workshop) the group level (within the claimed enclosures) and the collective design of a functional neighborhood. The submission of interim outcomes every few weeks (iterations) enable us to verify on a working model of the site, how the basic architectural emotions of the human species arise as the individual interests get articulated with those of the group and, in their turn, also the group interests get articulated with those of the studio.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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