Architectural succession: a multi-species approach to the built environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A novel approach to single-species design is urgently required. Urban expansion is directly \nimpacting global biodiversity, increasing habitat-threatened species reliance on human \ninfrastructure. Whereby recognizing the architect’s responsibility to provide habitat for \nadditional species, the built environment can be utilized for multi-species inhabitation. \nDerived from the natural cycle of ecological succession, Architectural Succession outlines \nthe process of change occurring for a built environments program and user over time. \nInformed by this framework, a Research Creation process examines the at-risk Chimney \nSwift and its food source within a successional multi-species structure. Further enhancing \nSudbury, Ontario’s, Regreening efforts, barren outcroppings offer significant opportunity \nfor multi-species built intervention, encouraging habitat recovery and the return of \nspecies at-risk. A wildlife observation pavilion explores the successional opportunities \nof traditional light wood frame construction undergoing the decomposition process to \nsupport the regrowth of the forest.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".