MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4301310873 · doi:10.52842/conf.ecaade.2009.161

From Formal to Behavioral Architecture: Few Notes on the Abstraction of Function

2009· article· en· W4301310873 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron Sprecher, Paul Kalnitz

Bibliographic record

VenueeCAADe proceedings · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicArchitecture and Computational Design
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersSyracuse University
KeywordsArchitectureComputer scienceAssociation (psychology)MemorizationFunction (biology)AbstractionReference architectureSoftware architectureHuman–computer interactionTheoretical computer scienceProgramming languageSoftwareMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the advent of information theories, contemporary architecture is approached in terms of the energetic formations of memorization, association and connection. The former architectural diagram becomes a concretization, an instance, one possibility, of an operational code. Memorization refers to the ability of architecture to embed information within the deepest composition of matter. Architectural performance has always been revealed by the integration, or association, of multiple parameters. Connections are vectors which fuse the knowledge of heterogeneous symbiotic human environments. In the “C-chair”, a project by our laboratory Open Source Architecture, abstract objects such as points, lines, and surfaces act as memorizers of information. As the codified system reacts to external forces, an association of two distinct graph structures is developed and connections are formed as the architectural object emerges.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.040
Scholarly communication0.0060.018
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeCAADe proceedingsSame topicArchitecture and Computational DesignFrench-language works237,207