Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe (eCAADe)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence of both visible and hidden digital resources in daily life is overwhelming and their presence continues to grow exponentially. It is surprising how little the impact of this evolution is questioned, especially in education. Reflecting on past experiences of this subject to learn for the future seems rarely to be done, and the sheer fact that a digital method exists is often seen as sufficient justification for its use. Are these the perceptions of serious misgivings or isolated views that circulate in the educational world and beyond? We would suggest that the eCAADe (Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe) and its conferences provide the ideal forum to provide answers in this debate. For the first conference in what is to be the next quarter century of the existence of eCAADe, a theme was chosen that could easily include all aspects of this debate: ARCHITECTURE ‘in computro’ , Integrating methods and techniques It seems a bit vulgar to use a dog-Latin phrase ‘in computro’ for such a serious matter but at least it now has a place between ‘in vivo’ and ‘in vitro’. For more than 25 years CAAD has been available, and has been more and more successfully used in research and commercial architectural practice. In education, which by definition should prepare students for the future, the constantly evolving CAAD metaphor is provoking a challenge to cope with the ever expanding scope of related topics. It is not surprising that this has led to differing opinions as to how CAAD should be taught. Questions such as how advanced research results can be incorporated in teaching, or if the Internet is provoking self-education by students, are in striking contrast with the more fundamental issues such as the discussion on analogue versus digital design methods. Is CAAD a part of design teaching or is it its logical successor in a global E-topia? Although the E of education is a prominent factor in the ‘raison d’être’ of the organisation, the papers presented at this conference illustrate that eCAADe is open to all other relevant contributions in the area of computer-aided architectural design. It will be a fortunate coincidence that this exchange of knowledge and opinions on such state-of-the-art subjects, will be hosted by the The Higher Institute of Architectural Sciences, Henry van de Velde, located in the historical buildings of the Royal Academy of Fine Art established since the founding of the academy in 1662.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.099 | 0.039 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".