MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965679711 · doi:10.22215/etd/2018-12956

Documenting the Intangible: A Methodology for the Documentation & Dissemination of the Spirit of Place

2018· dissertation· en· W2965679711 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. Granda

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUrban Design and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDocumentationDisseminationEngineeringComputer scienceKnowledge managementArchitectural engineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Through the study of existing conventions, theories, and methodologies related to the documentation and perception of the built environment, an integrated methodology will be proposed to better encapsulate the intangible elements, inextricably linked to the tangible elements, of the built environment. What intangible elements of the built environment are not being captured through conventional documentation & assessment methodologies? How do we effectively disseminate the knowledge acquired through this proposed methodology? The former Montreal-based manufacturer, Granda Hermanos y Cia will serve as a case study for the application of the proposed methodology for the documentation and dissemination of the intangible elements of the built environment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.599
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.291 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUrban Design and Spatial AnalysisFrench-language works237,207