MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767150508 · doi:10.4995/vlc.2017.6952

Hacia una arquitectura pragmática. El caso de Tous y Fargas

2017· article· en· W2767150508 on OpenAlex
David Hernández Falagán

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

VenueVLC arquitectura Research Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture and Art History Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstructiveAbandonment (legal)ArchitectureContext (archaeology)Quarter (Canadian coin)Product (mathematics)NonconformistEstateHumanitiesPoliticsSociologyEconomyPolitical scienceWelfare economicsHistoryEconomicsLawArtComputer scienceMathematicsProcess (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Tous & Fargas were a unique case in the field of Spanish architecture of the second half of the 20th century. From the technical and industrial experimentation of their first works, they developed a nonconformist architecture within the realistic conditions characteristic of the time, propitiated by the economic, political and social context. Despite of this, they achieved a remarkable success carrying out designs of technological type and giving support to the industrial innovation of constructive systems. However, during the last stage of their collaboration, traits characteristic of the pragmatic drift are visible to which much of the architecture of the last quarter of the 20th century was subjected. The excess of mercantile concern for the real estate product, the excessive systematization of the typological models and the constructive systems, the lack of a consistent theoretical discourse or the abandonment of the technical investigation as a priority of innovation are some of the symptoms that characterize the pragmatic architecture of their latest works<em>.</em></p>

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0160.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.279 · 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