Bibliographic record
Abstract
De Rijke’s Sliding House is a linear building of apparent simplicity, which is sliced into three programmes: house, garage and annexe. The separated forms are joined by a 20-ton mobile roof/wall enclosure that traverses the site, creating combinations of enclosure, insulation, open-air living and framed views. The Sliding House is an important and original contribution to the development of a bioclimatic architecture with high aesthetic impact. The semi-automated sliding shell moves insulation over or alongside the house in response to the seasons, providing protection tailored for local climatic conditions, and saving both heating and cooling energy. There is continuous post-occupancy energy monitoring by Aedas Research, which is using the house as a case study in developing a new online tool called CarbonBuzz, for measuring energy consumption in buildings. One of the main reasons for their choosing the Sliding House was to study the unique relationship between user and insulated sliding shell, the performance of which is affected by user choice. The building won and was shortlisted for numerous awards: winner, RIBA East Award (2009); winner, Grand Designs Awards ‘Best New-Build’, and ‘Home of the Year’ (2009); highly commended, World Architecture Festival Awards ‘House’ category (2009); shortlisted, D&AD Awards Environmental Design category (nominated for Yellow Pencil Award) (2009); shortlisted, The Wood Awards ‘Private’ category (2009). It received extensive review and publicity worldwide: a+a (China, 2009); Archicree (France, 2009); The Architectural Review/AR (UK, 2009); Architektura (Poland, 2009); Before + After (Taiwan, 2009); C3 (Korea, 2009); Dagens Industri Weekend (Sweden, 2009); De Architect (Netherlands, 2009); DETAIL (Germany, 2009); Elemente (Canada, 2009); Het Hout Blad (Slovenia, 2009); Indian Architect & Builder/IA&B (India, 2009); Interior Design China Magazine (China, 2009); Interni (Russia, 2009); Mark (International, 2009); Case da Abitare (Italy, 2010); Umran (Saudi Arabia, 2012); Avivre (France, 2012); and Dezeen Book of Ideas (2012).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".