MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6982184845

Henrion & Parkin’s Systematic Design Methods

2012· other· en· W6982184845 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of the Arts London Research Online (University of the Arts London) · 2012
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSociology and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)The artsIdentity (music)Graphic designSet (abstract data type)Field (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This seminar brought together six speakers invited to map current research drawing on F H K Henrion’s archive and to consider the opportunities it offers for research collaboration. The invited speakers were: Sue Breakell (University of Brighton), Adrian Shaughnessy (Royal College of Art), Rob Banham (University of Reading), David Preston (University of the Arts London), David Cabianca (York University, Canada) and Patrick O’Shea (Kingston University). The afternoon’s sessions related to existing research projects which, while they may not focus solely on Henrion, have his work as a component, contextualizing and enriching the field of study. The first of these was David Preston, a graphic designer and an Associate Lecturer at Central St Martins, as well as a PhD candidate at the RCA. Looking at several of Henrion’s early corporate design schemes, including Pest Control of Cambridge and the Dutch airline KLM, David described some of the systematic techniques developed by Henrion and his partner Alan Parkin to analyse and manage the various design outputs and formats in which corporate identity schemes would be presented. He set these in the context of other influential writing on systematic design methods such as that of Bruce Archer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.259
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.272
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score0.914

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2590.272
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0060.020
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.242 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of the Arts London Research Online (University of the Arts London)Same topicSociology and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207