Intermède. Construction, déconstruction, reconstruction : croisements en architecture et philosophie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Terrains d'architecture workshop makes learning to design architecture the place where architecture and anthropology come together. The text shows how, over time, the articulation of practices has taken on other forms, how it has been enriched by turning the fieldwork into a genuine problematisation, a kind of ethnography of the commission. The abattoirs of Anderlecht occupy a central place in this process, because it was in this field that the notion of the public began to demand greater consistency and nuance, and that a specific gesture was developed, that of importing. Importing what affected us and what appeared to us to be a strength of this site: these abattoirs and the possibility of arranging them differently in their neighbourhood and in the city. The text emphasises the links between the teaching situation and the project situation. What is done in the learning environment, in this case the project workshop, can also count outside it, provided that we do not confine ourselves to a sterile division of roles between practices. We need to try out other ways of articulating things, refusing to play the role of killjoy, leaving the field of representations, taking the architects at their best - their predisposition to look to the future and project situations into it, to work out scenarios - and learning with them to give consistency to these scenarios. Speculating with consistency: neither utopia nor ready-made vision.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".