Critical regionalism: cohousing an intentional community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thesis Statement \nThe use of regional "place defining” elements to explore the particulars of a context creates physical and conceptual support of human community and comfort. \nFacility Statement \nThe proposed facility is that of a cohouslng community. Cohousing communiities are designed to have a neighborhood layout. The facility will consist of a common house, private dwellings, outdoor common areas, gardens and parking areas. \nContext Statement \nThe site is located In DeKalb, New York. DeKalb is a small town in the St. Lawrence Valley in upstate New York., DeKalb is located toward In the upper portion of the state; approximately 15 miles from the nearest Canadian border and 120 miles north of Syracuse. DeKalb and most of the surrounding towns are commonly referred to as the "North Country.” \nScope of Project \nThe cohousing neighborhood is to become cooperative tool to actively seek family, community and a sense of belonging. The design of the community will be based on particular characteristics of the site.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".