Construct · 4 fields · 6 citations
One name. Different field. Different construct. One map.
● jingle · one word, four constructs Nearest construct by meaningpatterncompare the meaningsEvery construct on the map is compared with every other by the meaning of its definitions, and the closest one is surfaced here. The nearest construct to configuration is pattern.
Hold this as a prompt, not a verdict. Two constructs sitting close in meaning is a reason to read them side by side and decide for yourself whether they are one idea under two names. It is not proof that they are. Compare the meanings in the Collider.
Spokes are fields; dashed arcs are shared lineage. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.
Drag to watch the word get claimed. Each field appears at the publication date of the earliest source cited for it. Tap a year to see which.
The permanent three-dimensional arrangement of the atoms and bonds around a stereocenter that tells one stereoisomer from another and cannot be altered without breaking a bond. Cahn, Ingold, and Prelog's 1966 Specification of Molecular Chirality set out the R/S rules that assign a fixed label to each such arrangement, marking a molecule as right- or left-handed. Chemists carefully separate this fixed geometry from conformation, the flexible shape a molecule can twist into by simple rotation without breaking anything. This meaning is a static property of a single molecule, and it has nothing to do with a firm's structural type, a moving system's space of positions, or how a face is perceived.[1]
A coherent, internally consistent bundle of a firm's strategy, structure, and processes that recur together as one recognizable type, rather than varying one attribute at a time. Mintzberg's 1980 Structure in 5's proposed a small set of structural configurations, his gestalts, and Meyer, Tsui, and Hinings's 1993 review named this the configurational approach, in which organizations cluster into a few holistic patterns. This meaning is a pattern spanning many attributes of a social organization, found by typology or statistics, and it is unrelated to the fixed handedness of a molecule, the coordinate space of a moving system, or the perception of a whole face.[2][3]
The set of all the distinct positions a system can occupy, where each point stands for one complete placement of every part of the system. Lozano-Pérez's 1983 Spatial Planning: A Configuration Space Approach defined this for a robot as the space whose points are its possible configurations, so that planning a motion becomes tracing a path through that space around forbidden regions. The idea descends from classical mechanics, where the configuration space holds positions only, unlike phase space, which also holds momenta. This meaning is a mathematical space of the arrangements of a physical system, and it shares nothing with a molecule's fixed geometry, a firm's structural type, or the perception of a face.[4]
Perceiving a stimulus as one integrated pattern defined by the relations among its parts, rather than as a list of separate features. Maurer, Le Grand, and Mondloch's 2002 The many faces of configural processing distinguished several forms of this whole-pattern perception, and Tanaka and Farah's 1993 Parts and wholes in face recognition showed that a facial feature is recognized better inside the whole face than on its own. This meaning is a mode of human perception, gauged by behavioral tasks, and it is not the fixed geometry of a molecule, a firm's structural type, or a mechanical system's coordinate space.[5][6]
Next
See how configuration sits against neighbouring constructs in the Collider, or export every reference on this page in one click.
Open in ColliderExport BibTeXReport this collisionCited on this page?
If your work is cited behind one of these entries, you know better than we do whether we captured the meaning right. Confirm it, suggest an edit, or dispute it, and your name goes on the entry as an author who has checked it, linked to your ORCID.
Claim your construct