MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378808110 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.180517

The Contextual Design Criteria of Infill Building Façade in Malaysian Urban Historic Districts: A Systematic Review

2023· review· en· W4378808110 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohd Amirul Hakim Zamri, Mohd Hisyam Rasidi, Roshida Abdul Majid

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture and Cultural Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Teknologi Malaysia
KeywordsInfillArchitectural engineeringEnvironmental planningUrban designCivil engineeringGeographyUrban planningEngineeringConstruction engineeringEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The urban historic district is one of the man-made places with strong genius loci through its cultural heritage character and values.Architectural heritages are the core element constituting its urban fabric character.However, the emergence of infill buildings that intervene in the urban historic fabric with their conspicuous contrast faç ade architectural design threatens the genius loci of the urban historic districts.Therefore, this paper aims to systematically review the contextual architectural design criteria of infill building faç ade in urban historic districts.Using the content analysis method, this paper extracts the previous scholars' studies on heritage conservation guidelines, contextual infill building faç ade design approaches and the design criteria for the contextual infill building faç ade design in urban historic districts to answer the highlighted issues.In an urban historic district, the contemporary architectural intervention, especially the infill building faç ade design, must critically consider and respond to the existing urban fabric that has long been characterized by the place's genius loci to sustain its cultural heritage character and values.The infill building faç ade design must appropriately be articulated by balancing "compatibility" and "differentiation" elements in its architectural design as well as consider creating a "bond" and having family resemblance with the existing urban fabric of the historic district.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicArchitecture and Cultural InfluencesFrench-language works237,207