MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4301904680 · doi:10.52842/conf.ecaade.2006.710

A Theory of Artistry for 3D Data Fusion - The element of craft in digital reconstruction

2006· article· en· W4301904680 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael Jemtrud, Philam Nguyen, James C. Hayes, Grant Oikawa, Ryan McLennan

Bibliographic record

VenueeCAADe proceedings · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVisualizationRendering (computer graphics)DocumentationAbstractionExternal Data RepresentationComputer graphics (images)Computer visionProcess (computing)Protocol (science)Interpolation (computer graphics)Artificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionAnimation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The following paper will articulate through an urban renewal proposal project for an area in Montréal, Canada that uses a “3D imaging and modeling protocol” and that accounts for the interaction between mediation and making in digitizing and constructing existing conditions digital artifacts. The protocol incorporates multi-sensor technologies with modeling and rendering techniques through a process of interpolation between a heterogeneous set of existing photographic, physical, and 2D documentation. The mode of operation implemented is a multi-layered and hybrid approach that recognizes the interplay between human scale and perception, visualization and abstraction of data and geometric accuracy, space and time.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.030
Scholarly communication0.0120.011
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeCAADe proceedingsSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207