MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386774357 · doi:10.18280/ijdne.180413

Modeling an Interactive Interior Design Mechanism, Depending on the User’s Desires

2023· article· en· W4386774357 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maryam Nabil Al-Saigh, Khawola F. Mahmoud

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture, Design, and Social History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanism (biology)Human–computer interactionComputer scienceArchitectural engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study introduces an innovative paradigm for the development of interactive, userresponsive interior spaces.Historically, the design of interior spaces has been largely disconnected from the preferences and requirements of their occupants, necessitating user adaptation.However, advancements in technology, nanomaterials, and intelligent materials have paved the way for the customization of spaces to align with the individual needs and desires of users.Despite these technological advancements, a practical mechanism for the application of intelligent materials and technologies in the design of user-responsive spaces remains elusive.This study aims to address this gap by developing a novel software solution for the creation of color-responsive interactive spaces.The proposed software employs interactive smart materials, particularly thermochromic pigments, to enable spaces to engage with inhabitants in a dynamic manner.Preliminary findings from the Thermochromic Interior Design (TID) program indicate a consistent physiological response across different environments.Yet, the distinct color dynamics within each space foster a unique interactive experience.This study thus extends the current understanding in the field by proposing a proactive approach to interior design that capitalizes on smart materials and technologies.Furthermore, the research highlights the potential of these technologies in crafting adaptive and personalized spaces, posing a paradigm shift in our interaction with our environment.The adaptability and interactivity facilitated by such spaces could enhance user satisfaction and engagement across various contexts, from residential to commercial.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics→Same topicArchitecture, Design, and Social History→French-language works237,207→