MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4232414117 · doi:10.22215/etd/2018-13361

Folding as Utility, and Responsiveness: Prototyping in Ottawa

2018· dissertation· en· W4232414117 on OpenAlexaffabout
S.D. Logan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicArchitecture and Computational Design
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityConfederation College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFolding (DSP implementation)Computer scienceProtein foldingEngineeringChemistryMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis studies the utility of folding and how it could be a benefi cial addition to structures with regards to responsiveness. Folding has been used previously as a design technique for architectural forms. The built forms, however, rarely fold themselves. This thesis explores the forms that can be created through folding structures and the potential opportunities for use that they present. The folding techniques were discovered primarily through drawings and models that developed into folding structures that are responsive to the environment around them and informational input. Three folding structures were developed as an exhibition of the folding methods and the ways in which they can be used. These three structures are sited through Ottawa, Canada and serve as both useful, interactive public infrastructures and an addition to making these public areas more dynamic.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designOther design
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 topicArchitecture and Computational DesignFrench-language works237,207