MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1570154879 · doi:10.1582/leukos.2008.05.02.001

Effect of Window Glazing Type on Daylight Quality: Scale Model Study of a Living Room under Natural Sky

2008· article· en· W1570154879 on OpenAlexafffund
Nathalie Pineault, Marie-Claude Dubois

Bibliographic record

VenueLEUKOS The Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicImpact of Light on Environment and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersUniversité Laval
KeywordsGlazingDaylightSkyWindow (computing)Natural (archaeology)Architectural engineeringEnvironmental scienceScale (ratio)Quality (philosophy)DaylightingEngineeringGeographyMeteorologyComputer scienceCartographyCivil engineeringOpticsPhysicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the results of a study where the effect of five window glazing types on daylight quality was investigated using a scale model (1:6) of a room with a single, south east-oriented window exposed to the natural sky. The space studied simulated a typical, fully furnished living room. A total of 30 research subjects took part in the experiment, observed the room and filled questionnaires, which covered seven factors related to daylight quality: light level, glare (comfort), naturalness, beauty and pleasantness, precision, light distribution and shadows. This study repeated some results from previous investigations although a different experimental design was used (within-subject, random-order, no comparison to reference). The results of the statistical analysis (ANOVA) indicated that the glazing type had a statistically significant effect on the perception of light level, naturalness, beauty/pleasantness and precision. The visual transmittance of the glazing type was positively correlated with light level, glare (comfort), naturalness, beauty and pleasantness, and precision. The glazing type had no statistically significant effect on light distribution and shadows. The results also suggest that a color distortion in two directions yields more positive votes compared with a unidirectional color shift.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.717
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLEUKOS The Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North AmericaSame topicImpact of Light on Environment and HealthFrench-language works237,207