MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964500918

A new centre for civic engagement in architecture

2019· dissertation· en· W2964500918 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sahana Dharmaraj

Bibliographic record

VenueLu Zone Ul (Laurentian University) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture, Design, and Social History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectureCivic engagementPolitical scienceSociologyVisual artsArtPoliticsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How connected are residents to the development of architecture in their respective
\ncommunities? This inquiry precipitates from the growing concern that the degree of
\nengagement between the greater public and the discipline of architecture is dismally
\nminute. At a local level, residents are left largely uninformed of the swift expansion
\nthat often radically alters their surroundings. Architecture centres attempt to address
\nthis divide by hosting a variety of programmes—such as lectures, exhibitions and
\nworkshops—that enable those not versed in architectural discourse to question and
\ncontest their built environment. Drawing from communication theory and the field of
\ngraphic design, this thesis explores the architecture centre as a locus of community
\nengagement and participative debate fueled by information made accessible through
\nrigorous visual communication strategies.
\nFrom an in-depth study of architecture centres, globally and nationally, emerges five
\ndistinct types of centres: the "institution", the "centre", the "hub", the "temporary" and
\nthe "digital". Case studies of each type reveal that reanalysis of the operative functions
\nof architecture centres is necessary to envision even further salient methods of engaging
\nthe public. This thesis argues that architecture can be made accessible by learning from
\nsystems of communication employed by contemporary communication agencies and
\ngraphic designers. Experimentation-through-making of print media such as zines and
\nposters assists in understanding how best to convey messages to the target audience.
\nThe thesis posits that an architecture centre sited in a community that is projected to
\nsee rapid, unprecedented growth will act as a proactive means of spurring a dialogue
\nbetween architects and residents to ensure all voices are being accounted for in their
\nprospective built environment. The design of an architecture centre further develops the
\nproposition that democratizing architectural ideas and planning processes can aid in
\nelevating the quality of future development in a community; and ultimately act as an
\nexample of a single centre that would compromise a much larger network of analogous
\ncentres working in tandem across Canada.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLu Zone Ul (Laurentian University)Same topicArchitecture, Design, and Social HistoryFrench-language works237,207