Quantifying the Intangible, A Tool for Retrospective Protocol Studies of Sketching During the Early Conceptual Design of Architecture
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
Sketching is a craft supporting the development of ideas and design intentions, as well as an effective tool for communication during the early architectural design stages by making them tangible. Even though sketch-based interaction is a promising approach for Computer-Aided Architectural Design (CAAD) systems, it remains a challenge for computers to recognise information in a sketch. Design protocol studies conducted to deconstruct the sketch and sketching process collect solely qualitative data so far. However, the 'metis' projects aim to create an intelligent design assistant, using an artificial neural network (ANN), in the manner of NegroponteÂs Architecture Machine. By assimilating to the user's idiosyncrasies, the system suggests further design steps to the architect to improve the design decision making process for economic growth, qualitative self-education through the dialogue and reducing stress. For training such ANN quantitative data is needed. In order to produce quantifiable results from such a study, we propose our open-source web-tool ÂSketch Protocol AnalyserÂ. By correlating different parameters (i.e. video, transcript and sketch built) through the same labels and their timestamps, we create quantitative data for further use.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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