Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first part of this chapter presents a research-creation project that took the form of an interactive exhibition named ‘DNA-The Future Life of Objects’. Based on the metaphor of a scientific research lab, the exposition presents a manifesto linking the world of objects to the world of life forms, hence the reference to DNA. While establishing a parallel between the system of objects and the world of living organisms, this manifesto poses a critical perspective concerning our relation with objects and raises fundamental questions about the notions of durability, environmental degradation, overconsumption and emotional attachment; it also anticipates the potential repercussion of connected objects and artificial intelligence on our private lives. In the second part of the chapter, the author looks at the impacts and challenges of applying the principles of the DNA manifesto to design education. If nature becomes the prevailing model to follow, design education needs to integrate with a much more acute perspective the fundamental principles of biology – the ‘science of life’ – and to focus the foundation of the design thinking process toward biomimicry. Recent explorations show that such a shift causes major impacts and ethical challenges at many levels for design curricula.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".