MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946480077 · doi:10.7480/iphs.2018.1.2763

Framing a new discourse on the notion of habitat in transforming societies

2018· article· en· W2946480077 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohamad Sedighi, Rohan Varma

Bibliographic record

VenueTU Delft Library (Tu Delft) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture and Cultural Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)ArchitectureRegionalism (politics)Human rightsPolitical scienceSociologyPolitical economyEconomyMedia studiesGeographyLawArchaeologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reveals how the second Iran International Congers of Architects (IICA), held in Persepolis- Shiraz in 1974, and the first UN Habitat conference, held in Vancouver, Canada in 1976 played an instrumental role in shaping a discourse on the notion of regionalism in the design for human habitats, especially in developing countries. Building upon a brief analysis of the works of Nader Ardalan, Kamran Diba, Charles Correa, Balkrishna Vithaldas Doshi and Raj Rewal, this paper discussed the incorporation of the ideas published in the Habitat Bill of Rights within their private commissions for large scale housing schemes and master plans in their respective countries, Iran and India. More crucially, this paper argues that both events helped bring together these architects who later, in different capacities, played significant roles as members of the Aga Khan Award for Architecture in fostering and promoting an alternative way of adapting modernism to industrializing countries.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0130.089
Scholarly communication0.0140.016
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTU Delft Library (Tu Delft)Same topicArchitecture and Cultural InfluencesFrench-language works237,207