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
Designing the Landscape is more than creating open spaces -adjusting the relief, organizing building and green elements -planning the Landscape is thinking about the relationship with the world.Nowadays, we must dream of overcoming the modern worldview, proposing other values and ways of operating in the physical world.It is necessary to think of the Landscape as a means of rehearsing overcoming the Copernican revolution, removing man from the center of the universe, critically redesigning the coexistence between men and the natural world, assuming that the collapse of the planet is a mirror of our inability to respect limits and conditions.This text understands a project as a dispute and pact, as the fruit of agreements, as a means of negotiating and tensioning expectations and demands that are often antagonistic, as an exercise in collective construction that goes beyond the exercise of form as a manifestation of authorship or historical affiliation.Therefore, a project can be seen as a space for experimentation and materializing new values.It is also understood that practices are historically constructed and, at the same time, they construct us.Thus, better projects, the result of more successful negotiations, dialectically, will result in the transformation of all the agents who built them.What we build thereafter built us; the Landscape we see is our mirror and, at the same time, our opportunity for transformation and learning.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.010 |
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