An Empirical Study of How Socio-Spatial Formations are Influenced by Interior Elements and Displays in an Office Context
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 design of a workplace can have a profound impact on the effectiveness of the workforce utilizing the space. When considering dynamic social activities in the flow of work, the constraints of the static elements of the interior reveals the adaptive behaviour of the occupants in trying to accommodate these constraints while performing their daily tasks. To better understand how workplace design shapes social interactions, we ran an empirical study in an office context over a two week period. We collected video from 24 cameras in a dozen space configurations totaling 1,920 hours of recorded activities. We utilized computer vision techniques, to produce skeletonized representations of the occupants, to assist in the annotation and data analysis process. We present our findings of socio-spatial formation patterns and the effects of furniture and interior elements on the observed behaviour of collaborators for both computer-supported work and for unmediated social interaction. Combining the observations with an interview of the occupants' reflections, we discuss dynamics of socio-spatial formations and how this knowledge can support social interactions in the domain of space design systems and interactive interiors.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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