MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005328510 · doi:10.22215/etd/2017-11926

Collectively Intelligent Material Systems: Compositing Digital Systems Within Architectural Smart Material Applications

2017· dissertation· en· W3005328510 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Lerch

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicArchitecture and Computational Design
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmart materialArchitectureField (mathematics)Process (computing)Systems engineeringEngineeringArchitectural engineeringCompositingArchitectural patternComputer scienceFacadeSoftware engineeringArtificial intelligenceCivil engineeringNanotechnologySoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Developed through the field of material science in the late 90's, 'smart materials' have been employed by the fields of science and engineering to miniaturize, expand and reflect a physical world saturated with information rich environments.However, these 'smartmaterials' are infrequently employed by architects to address both technical, aesthetic and spatial architectural issues.This thesis aims to uncover this hesitation by design professionals, critiquing the reference of 'smart' and proposes a Collectively Intelligent Material system (CIM system).This design proposal sets forth a practical response to truly intelligent architecture through specific models of Collectively Intelligent Material (CIM) applications by producing 'smart composite' facade experimentations.The work seeks to combine the process of optical lithography and Arduino based digital processing to develop a CIM system.This can be employed by the architect over new or existing façades to facilitate intelligent building surfaces.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.214 · 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
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArchitecture and Computational DesignFrench-language works237,207