DESA1002 'Nine Quarter City' - <Anuradha Seneviratne>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This semester my project was a student housing project. I chose this project to follow with because I have some knowledge in the area as well as it suited my location. The overall theme for Venice was to create new and interesting places for the youth to hang out. Keeping this in my mind, during the weekly exercises I consciously tried to drive my project in a modern, youthful direction. I also consciously wanted the project to look different to the function. These two key points made my vague vision to reality. The building structure was to look like an image of an exploding object while the cladding reflects the modern era (the 21st century). The faces of the building facing to the sky were clad with photovol glass, which absorbs the heat of the sunlight but allows the daylight to pass through. This heat is transferred into electricity for the building. The faces facing away from the sky were clad with reflective glass. This allows spaces, which are enclosed seemed more closed, and spaces, which are open, more open. This play on the psychology suited the position of the building; also the appreciation of the courtyard. The interior also took an interesting turn; rather than having rows of rooms, I decided to create small apartments for students. Four students will share a kitchen and a bathroom. This was effective because it strengthens bonds between students and thus strengthening the community feeling which was the key to this project. The connecting bridges also help to strengthen this feeling.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.007 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".