MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173444922 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.160318

Adaptive Reuse of Manor Houses: Modernism and Tradition in Fernando Távora’s Approach for Heritage Renovation

2021· article· en· W3173444922 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David Ordóñez Castañón, Teresa Cunha Ferreira, Santiago Sánchez Beitia

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaEuropean Regional Development FundEuskal Herriko Unibertsitatea
KeywordsAdaptive reuseModernism (music)PortugueseArchitectural engineeringIdentity (music)Architectural styleArchitectureReuseArchitectural designSociologyHistoryAestheticsEngineeringArchaeologyArt historyArtLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article seeks to analyze the methodology and principles underlying the intervention of the Portuguese architect and professor Fernando Távora (1923-2005) in the renovation of manor houses in the north of Portugal. Throughout his renowned professional career, Távora designed the refurbishment of numerous country houses, managing to adapt uses and spaces to the new requirements without undermining their strong identity in the landscape and their historical and architectural values. Thus, the study of his particular methodology can provide design guidelines to approach the adaptive reuse of this cultural legacy with respect for its heritage values, especially in rural areas undergoing a severe process of depopulation and agro-productive transformation. Three case studies have been selected in order to determine the evolution and consolidation of his practice: The Casa da Igreja in Mondim de Basto (1958-1961), the Casa da Covilhã (1963-1988) and the Casa da Breia (1984-1985). These renovation projects reveal careful analysis of the preexistence, supporting sensitive introduction of new elements with subtle contemporary expression in respectful continuity with the forms and atmospheres of the past.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.040
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.149 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicCultural Heritage Management and PreservationFrench-language works237,207