Dos Conversaciones: Richard Sennett Charles Correa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En esta entrevista, Richard Sennett habla de la democracia y las relaciones espaciales a las que da lugar. La esfera de lo público, constituida por la comunicación visual entre los sujetos, y su espacio natural, la ciudad, tienen como característica la incompletitud: las políticas de diseño sobre estas entidades no pueden apuntar a lo contrario. \n Conversación con Charles Correa \n Charles Correa, desde su aguda visión, comenta sobre la práctica de la arquitectura y el diseño urbano en el contexto de una sociedad compleja como la de India. Durante la conversación aparecen temas que atraviesan ámbitos políticos y económicos característicos de las ciudades del tercer mundo, un mundo que claramente refleja las fisuras de una cultura globalizada. \n Antonio Lipthay \n Arquitecto P.U.C., 1998. MSc City Design and Social Science en The London School of Economics and Political Science. Trabaja como arquitecto residente para Londres en la oficina MBM Arquitectes (Martorell/Bohigas/Mackay), y como consultor de diseño para la ciudad de Verona como parte del LSE City Design Enterprise Team \n Justine Graham Licenciada en Cultura y Política en la Universidad de Georgetown, Washington D.C., 1999. Master en Urban Studies en The London School of Economics and Political Science, 2001. Actualmente trabaja como urbanista y fotógrafa en The Architecture Foundation, Londres. \n NOTAS \n 1 El arquitecto y urbanista Daniel H. Burnham nació en Henderson, Nueva York, el 7 de sptiembre de 1846. A los 27 años, Burnham se asoció con John Welborn Root para establecer así una de las oficinas de arquitectura más famosas de la historia de los Estados Unidos. Fueron los pioneros en los métodos de construcción que permitieron la aparición de los rascacielos, cambiando para siempre los skyline de las ciudades norteamericanas. \n 2 Students: Martin Harradine, Geographer UCL, MSc LSE City Design and Social Science; Alessandra Molinari, Architect Politecnico di Milano, MSc LSE City Design and Social Sciences, Elana Rosenberg, Economist, Canada, MSc LSE City Design and Social Sciences; Maren Harnack, Architect Stutgardt, MSc LSE City Design and Social Sciences; Valentina Ciborra, Engineer, Politecnico di Milano MSc LSE City Design and Social Science;Felipe Errázuriz, Architect PUC, MSc LSE City Design and Social Science; Antonio Lipthay, Architect PUC, MSc LSE City Design and Social Science Victoria Scanlogne, Geographer, Kings College, MSc LSE City Design and Social Sciences; Hei Wen Chen, Urban Planner Taipei, MSc LSE City Design and Social Science;Ajay Chanajil, Urban Planing Pensilvania, MSc Cities Space and Society; Justine Graham, International Relations Georgetown, MSc Cities Space and Society; Antonio Lipthay, Architect PUC, MSc LSE City Design and Social Science. \n\n Professor: Charles Correa, Architect MIT; Max Steuer, Economist LSE Director PhD Department Cities Programme; Roger Zogolovich, Architect AA RIBA Tutor Cities Programme; Kathryn Firfh, Architect Harvard Co-Director Cities Programme; Ricky Burdett, Architect Director Cities Programme.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.087 | 0.036 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".