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
The starting point for designers in a circular system will often be identifying an inventory of potential second use materials and components. They then develop their design ideas around the tectonic characteristics of the materials. This can be seen as a restriction or a positive inspiration for creating meaningful ecological architecture suitable for the circular economy. Since availability of reclaimed materials and components is currently less predictable, flexibility in design and tolerance to alternatives by the project team and owner are important. The building design community needs to review and adapt conventional practices to increase demand for, and effectively integrate, reclaimed materials and components. This paper considers the architectural process implications and opportunities from reuse. As design teams adopt strategies to increase use of reclaimed materials and components, it is likely that the standard project management stages used by design teams may need to be adapted to facilitate a process better suited to circular strategies. New partnerships need to be formed, and new tools developed. Learning from existing projects a series of strategies are reviewed.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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