MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6929271692 · doi:10.4224/40003277

Research towards a Performance-Based Building Code: preliminary analysis NBC. Part 3: fire and life safety provisions

2024· report· en· W6929271692 sur OpenAlexafffundvenueabout

Notice bibliographique

RevueNPARC · 2024
Typereport
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueLeprosy Research and Treatment
Établissements canadiensNational Research Council Canada
Organismes subventionnairesNational Research Council Canada
Mots-clésScope (computer science)CommissionBuilding codeFire safetyCode (set theory)Research program

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Motivated by successes and continued evolution of international developments in performance-based design and performance-based codes, the question is posed whether there may be opportunities for Canada to capitalize on the international experiences and lessons learned. In response, an overall project, Research towards a Performance-Based Building Code, was initiated with the intent to investigate and collate international approaches, experiences, and benefits observed so far so they can be considered in a Canadian context. The overall scope of this research project intends to cover fire and life safety provisions in Part 3 and earthquake provisions in Part 4 of Division B of the 2015 edition of the National Building Code (NBC). This project will ultimately require the coordination of efforts between the research and the code development communities to identify knowledge gaps and future research needs in the areas of fire and life safety and earthquake design. It is proposed that results from this project inform the code development system and, perhaps, the discussion whether to introduce a new performance-based compliance path in the NBC, which would follow its due process, as determined by the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes (CCBFC). As a foundational step to support this overall effort, an understanding of the current portion of performance requirements in the NBC would be beneficial. Where performance requirements refer to provisions that have a clearly defined level of performance, this requires measurable performance targets, clearly defined evaluation methods and a thorough understanding of how the intended level of performance was developed. A high-level survey of the current provisions that are prescriptive, performance, or a combination would provide a starting point to identify where there are groups of code provisions with no clear level of performance identified, topics that may need additional review and potential research to develop performance targets with the associated measurement methods. The preliminary analysis of the fire and life safety provisions of Part 3 of the NBC 2015 is summarized in the report. This effort was designed to provide a fundamental step towards understanding the proportion of current requirements with prescriptive or performance-based targets, whether the values for these targets are qualitative, quantitative, or a combination, and the associated measurement methods. This preliminary analysis is undertaken to support a better understanding of the opportunities and obstacles of a performance-based approach for the NBC in the Canadian context. In the short-term, improvement in setting the level of performance for each provision may improve our approach to alternative solutions—within the current code compliance options—and inform potential for impact and benefits of developing a new compliance option via a performance-based code framework. Such an improvement towards a more performance-based code may support the harmonization of building code requirements across Canada by providing performance targets for the safety level of buildings, so that individual prescriptive requirements may be discussed within the broader context of the intended performance of a building or part thereof. In addition, a clearly described performance framework and approach with quantified performance targets may also help to create a level playing field for various construction materials, products and technologies, and expedite national and international trade.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,524
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,106
Tête enseignante GPT0,416
Écart entre enseignants0,310 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2024
Routes d'admission4
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNPARCMême sujetLeprosy Research and TreatmentTravaux en français237 207