MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7060643728

Sliding House

2009· other· en· W7060643728 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArchive of research processes and output produced by RCA (Royal College of Art) · 2009
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnclosureDoorsArchitecturePublicityVernacular architecturePencil (optics)Porch
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.778
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2220.111

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchive of research processes and output produced by RCA (Royal College of Art)Same topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207