MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411618003 · doi:10.51847/pqqch2mhd4

10.51847/pQqch2mhD4

2000· article· en· W4411618003 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTime to knit · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityArchitectureProcess (computing)PsychologyComputer architectureProcess managementComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionCognitive scienceEngineeringSocial psychologyArtProgramming languageVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Creativity, as one of the great manifestations of human thought, is important in today's world.Creativity is a mental process aimed at producing an innovative and valuable product.The creativity process in the mind of a creative architect has two dimensions of imagination and conception.The imagination is the creation of images in the minds of the architect who freely develops ideas for the creation of an architectural work, and conception in the architecture of mental imagery to build an image of the architectural effect that has actually been and has never been seen.Conception and imagination are architectural prerequisites for architectural creativity.Now, if environmental components are in the process of improving the environment, they can help promote creativity and take steps to create innovative and creative effects.Environmental factors in a physical environment have a great influence on increasing of creative growth.The purpose of this research is to recognize the concept of creativity and to study the environmental conditions and factors affecting the promotion of creativity in the process of forming an architectural creation.The research method was descriptive-analytic and collecting library information.This paper, while explaining the concept of creativity and creativity in architecture, will show the role of environmental stimuli in enhancing architectural creativity and the results of this study will provide environmental factors that stimulate creativity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.9970.994

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.183 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTime to knitSame topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207