Bibliographic record
Abstract
RESEARCH BACKGROUND Light Pour was created in response to an invitation from the National Design Centre Melbourne to respond to the saying: "It never rains, it pours" and exhibited as one of three floating palaces on the Yarra River, curated by Kathy Demos for the 2007 State of Design Festival, Melbourne. The installation explored innovative ways of utilising optical fibre beyond conventional commercial applications. RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION Typically optical fibre is used to carry information, its use as a design material is less explored territory. Experimenting with the material and its ability to emit light, by crimping the fibres a cascade of light was created. Made from 30,000 baking cups hand-glued into the shape of a large rain cloud from which 130 optical fibres were hung, when illuminated, 'Light Pour' resembled a rainstorm of light floating inside a glass palace on the river; its watery reflection made the rain appear to come from the river, as if the viewer was floating on the sky. The illusionary effect created an unexpected experience of the natural world, offering a different perspective on the small seemingly insignificant things in our everyday lives. The use of paper baking cups in this installation offered a new dimension on the use of the mundane and insignificant materials in design. RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE Light Pour was a larger-scale companion piece to Some Kind of Wonderful. It has been featured in the international design journal On Site Review (Canada) in 2009.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.161 | 0.061 |
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".