Proyecto inmobiliario Conjunto Residencial Ontario : parámetros arquitectónicos y planteamiento estructural
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El proyecto arquitectónico del Conjunto Residencial "Ontario", contempla la construcción de 5 bloques de edificios de 5 pisos cada bloque distribuidos en forma de "J" inversa, 3 bloques con 2 departamentos por piso y 2 bloques con 4 departamentos por piso; para obtener un total de 80 departamentos, encerrando en la parte central un parque alameda y playa de estacionamiento para una capacidad de 28 automóviles en la entrada del terreno. \nEl terreno es de 46x67 m con un área de 3,082 m2. \nCada departamento tiene dentro de su distribución, una sala comedor-integrada, tres dormitorios, una cocina, dos servicios higiénicos completos y una lavandería. Solo se tiene una tipología de departamentos con variaciones en la ubicación de las puertas de entrada y ventanas. El proyecto considera instalaciones de agua, desagüe, eléctricas y comunicación. \nEl proyecto arquitectónico del Conjunto Residencial "Ontario" se fundamenta en el hecho de que cumple con la normatividad, al mismo tiempo que cumple con las expectativas para el segmento socioeconómico al que está dirigido.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".