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
The task of situating applies as well to broader discussions, which include such topics as the creative economy, design for sustainability, and universal design. Authors explore how these big ideas apply in Alberta and how local applications can inform general understandings of these topics. This is a unique exploration; there are few surveys of design in Alberta, let alone analyses of local design work. The focus of the book, as one of the first publications on the subject, is necessarily broad. It provides a lay of the land to characterize design in Alberta and to highlight important issues for the local design community and for local arts, culture, industry, and planning. The word situating also hints at the concept of situated knowledge, often employed in socially engaged and critical writing. Situated knowledge refers to understandings informed by context: personal experience, culture, and geographic location, for example. Contributors to the book have strong Alberta connections and write from their perspectives as local designers, researchers, educators, and design students. This range of experience helps anchor discussions on topics of local interest and relevance and includes reflections on local culture, studies of successful (and less successful) companies, critiques of design training, calls to action, and visions of future practice.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.047 | 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