Discoverability, availability, circularity: an upcycling design workshop
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Collective efforts to encourage the climate transition raises essential questions regarding industrial design practices. On that matter, the design process, based on the creation of goods using new resources, is questioned. Design needs to adapt and question its practices with the global desire to reduce the use of new energy, material, and resources. This paper explores the integration of upcycling and circular design in a workshop as part of the training of industrial designers. Based on the principle of “form follows availability”, the initiative stands out as complementary to traditional design workshop projects. The workshop is presented in detail with its learning objectives, partners and daily activities. Upon the completion of the workshop, reflexions are raised regarding the benefits of this experience for the formation of designers. First, we raise crucial differences that occurred during the design process, which was influenced by the resources available. Second, we discuss specific theoretical notions that were introduced and discussed as part of the workshop. In particular, the new concept of “discoverability” introduces the importance to let the exploration of already available material resources guide the design process to stimulate new ideas. Finally, we underline the importance of partners and other social contributors to the quality of the projects and workshop.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it