Fabbriche di condivisione. Progettare la rigenerazione dell’abitare
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Factories of Shared Living. Designing the Renewal of Housing. The epochal change the world is undergoing raises questions about urban housing models. This situation also offers a chance to reimagine the question of lofts. The essence of this model was less about temporary final configurations and more about the desire to investigate dynamic processes for the renewal of decommissioned industrial properties and new forms of participation. Similarly, the challenge today is to invert the individualist-consumerist approach to housing, founded more on separation than on inclusion. Analysing the theme of “living in a factory,” the text looks at such examples as the Coopérative d’habitation Station n° 1 in Montreal, the project for Le Chais in Bordeaux, the Torpedo Hall Apartments in Copenhagen, the citadel of social housing in the former Le Blan spinning mills in Lille, the transformation of the Titano ceramics factory in San Marino, the Savonnerie Heymans social housing complex in Brussels, the Passage du Sucre lofts in Barcelona and Lots Road in London. The exploration continues with the Bamboo Micro Housing Proposal presented at the Hong Kong Architecture Biennale in 2014, the ZAC urban project for the Brun cookie factory in Saint-Martin-d’Hères, the Mill Junction Project in Johannesburg, the Can Planell and Kanaal Wijnegem and the recently completed refurbishment of the Fabra i Coats textile factory in Barcelona. These case studies help us look beyond experimentation to imagine the reconstruction not only of buildings, but also of our very idea of collective dwelling.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.011 |
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".