MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177395485 · doi:10.7480/abe.2021.14

A+BE | Architecture and the Built Environment, No. 14 (2021): How Heritage Learns

2021· article· en· W3177395485 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicholas Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Cultural heritagePublic housingAdaptation (eye)Quarter (Canadian coin)Industrial heritageSet (abstract data type)Architectural engineeringPolitical scienceEconomyEnvironmental ethicsSociologyCultural heritage managementPublic relationsHistoryEngineeringArchaeologyVisual artsEconomicsComputer scienceLawArtPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How Heritage Learns explores the dynamics that come into play when public housing becomes valourised as heritage in the Netherlands and how that, in turn modulates the evolution of this protected housing. It builds on the foundation set by the thesis of Steward Brand, that buildings learn through the adaptation of their fabric to external forces: changing fashion, technologies and economy. This dissertation investigates different key drivers for change: Energy, Economy and Comfort (2E+Co). To understand how and why the housing heritage evolved over time, an ecology of ideas is developed that sees buildings as organisms evolving and learning in their environments, providing a multi-sided theoretic model for analysis. Three case studies are extensively explored: the Justus van Effen Quarter in Rotterdam (1921–22) and the King’s Wives of Landlust (1937–38) and Jeruzalem public housing complexes (1949–52), both in Amsterdam. These are all exemplary monuments of Dutch public housing and all three have undergone repeat renovations since their construction. The research not only highlighted their various learning cycles, but also uncovered exciting new information on their origins and histories. What sets public housing heritage apart is the presence of a Story. However, the case studies reveal that the Stones were modulated by dominant 2E+Co ambitions common to all public housing. Above all, How Heritage Learns shows that past promises of increased performance and efficiency were never fulfilled. Without structured reflective observation we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes. Such lessons are all the more important at a time when the built environment stands at the cusp of another revolution driven by environmental imperatives.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.620
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designObservational
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 venueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)Same topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207