Mamwi Gidaanjitoomin/Together We Build It: A Systematic Review of Traditional Indigenous Building Structures in North America and Their Potential Application in Contemporary Designs to Promote Environment and Well-Being
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
(1) Background: Housing has long been recognized as an essential determinant of health. Our sense of home goes beyond physical shelter and is associated with personal or collective connections with spaces and places. However, modern architecture has gradually lost its connections between people and places; (2) Methods: We examined traditional Indigenous architecture and how it can be utilized in contemporary settings to restore connections to promote the environment, health, and well-being. (3) Results: We found that traditional Indigenous building structures may be the best manifestation of the Indigenous interconnected and holistic worldviews in North America, containing thousands of years of knowledge and wisdom about the land and the connection between humans and the environment, which is the foundation of reciprocal well-being; (4) Conclusions: Learning from the traditional structures, we proposed that modern architects should consider the past, present, and future in every endeavor and design and to utilize traditional knowledge as a crucial source of inspiration in creating works that are beneficial for both current and future generations by taking collectivism, health and well-being, and the environment into consideration in designs.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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