KAJIAN KONSEP ARSITEKTUR IKONIK PADA BANGUNAN PERKANTORAN DENGAN STUDI KASUS SOUTH QUARTER OFFICE DI JAKARTA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRAK. Pada masa saat ini arsitektur berkembang semakin pesat karena banyaknya konsep arsitektur yang berkembang, salah satunya adalah munculnya bangunan-bangunan ikonik di berbagai tempat bagian dari dunia. Bangunan ikonik merupakan bangunan yang menandai suatu tempat atau suatu zaman, bangunan ikonik seringkali terletak di lokasi strategis seperti persimpangan jalan, taman dan ruang terbuka. Keberadaan bangunan ikonik memberikan dampak yang besar terhadap daerah sekitarnya, bahkan mampu memasarkan wajah kota di masing-masing negara. Seiring berjalannya waktu banyaknya bangunan yang dikatakan ikonik belum memenuhi indikator ikonik karena masih minimnya makna dan penerapan ciri-ciri ikonik pada bangunan tersebut. Oleh karena itu, perlunya penulis melakukan penelitian terkait konsep arsitektur ikonik, dengan studi kasus, South Quarter Office. Sedangkan metode yang akan diterapkan adalah deskriptif kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa bangunan South Quarter Office merapkan konsep arsitektur ikonik yang di perlihatkan oleh ciri-cirinya yaitu: Bentuk bangunan yang atraktif secara visual. (attractive form), Bentuk yang simetris pada bangunan (simetrical form), Elemen berulang pada fasad (continuous rhythm), Memiliki pesan atau makna spesifik (specific signified by the building), Berada pada lokasi yang strategis (strategic location), Bentuk metafora (Metaphor Forms), Teknologi bangunan kekinian (Contemporary building technology). Kata Kunci: arsitektur, ikonik, bentuk, atraktif, metafora ABSTRACT. At this time architecture is growing rapidly because of the many architectural concepts that have developed, one of which is the emergence of iconic buildings in various parts of the world. Iconic buildings are buildings that mark a place or an era, iconic buildings are often located in strategic locations such as crossroads, parks, and open spaces. The existence of iconic buildings has a great impact on the surrounding area, even being able to market the face of the city in each country. Over time, many buildings that are said to be iconic have not met the iconic indicators because of the lack of meaning and application of iconic characteristics in the building. Therefore, the author needs to conduct research related to iconic architectural concepts, with a case study, South Quarter Office. The method to be applied is qualitative descriptive. The results showed that the South Quarter Office building applies the iconic architectural concept shown by its characteristics, namely: The shape of the building is visually attractive. (attractive form), A symmetrical form on the building (symmetrical form), Repeating elements on the façade (continuous rhythm), Have a specific message or meaning (specific signified by the building), Be in a strategic location (strategic location), Metaphor forms (Metaphor Forms), Contemporary building technology (Contemporary building technology). Keywords: architecture, iconic, form, attractive, metaphor
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.078 | 0.019 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".