Centre for Human-Animal Assisted Therapy: A Symbiotic Healing Space for People and Rescue Dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This Master of Interior Design practicum proposes a design for a Centre that serves to foster symbiotic healing between people and rescue dogs who suffer from mental illnesses. Situated in Winnipeg, Manitoba, this Centre is designed as a healing centre where people and rescue dogs are brought together in therapy and promote a collective recovery. For people and rescue dog groups, the treatment process in overcoming trauma and battling forms of mental illnesses and behaviour issues share similar struggles. These difficulties include behaviour conditioning, social support, and severe fear of environmental trauma. Aspects associated with mental wellness—particularly intellectual, emotional, and social dimensions of health—are used as a catalyst to explore the joint activities in the rehabilitation process of each patient group. The two therapy methods of Eye Motion Desensitization Reprocessing (EMDR) Therapy and Behaviour Conditioning are explored to direct the study to identify stimulant factors, understand the impact of routine and familiarization, and behavioural reactions. With this, the practicum proposes a design solution that provenances the built environment and acts as a vital aid in the rehabilitation process, giving patients support that serves to help them focus on their present recovery and anchoring a patient’s stability to the process. Using the Theory of Sensory Design, focusing on acoustic control, visual hierarchy and texture integration, the Centre is designed to resonate with the methods of EMDR Therapy and behaviour conditioning, providing environmental support to desensitization and lowering impacts of trigger factors. This practicum presents how interior design strategies and solutions, focusing on user sensitivity and needs, can help strengthen the built environment’s attributes in the healing process.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.005 |
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".