Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada’s housing market has been unaffordable, inaccessible, and commodified for a long time. Due to the ever-increasing real-estate prices and critical housing shortages, there has been an elevated need for more alternative amenity-rich housing, which evolves with the competitive nature of the housing market. This thesis explores communal living and proposes an alternative rental typology within the expanding urban centers of Canada geared towards young professionals working to afford their own homes. The design proposal will learn from the historical and modern communal living typologies that show significant community involvement, social benefits, and economic advantages. The design proposal aims to adapt to the growing urban downtown environment as an alternative urban residential option that will be socially and environmentally healthy, affordable, and foster positive, supportive relationships between the residents. By learning from existing communal living models, this design strategy utilizes the concept of cluster communities, a modified version of communal living that includes tiered common spaces servicing designated floors of residents, forming various micro-communities within the apartment tower block. The alternative residential typology can contribute to the residents’ success and the community’s betterment. It seeks to resolve the tension between the needs and desires of the individuals and the larger community’s interests by dissolving the barrier between them. This thesis does not present a solution to the housing crisis; instead, it proposes an alternative option and attitude to approach modern living that has its roots in how people have lived together in history.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.296 | 0.067 |
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".