MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1648449833 · doi:10.1080/10789669.2012.736812

Optical model for prismatic glazing (1415-RP)

2013· article· en· W1648449833 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHVAC&R Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlazingOfficerTransmittanceRay tracing (physics)DaylightingArchitectural engineeringComputer scienceOpticsEngineeringMechanical engineeringStructural engineeringCivil engineeringPhysicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prismatic glazing is found in many building applications, such as complex fenestration systems to control solar heat gains and glare and re-direct sunlight to building interior spaces and daylighting (and lighting) systems to enhance their optical and lighting performance. However, modeling and simulation of such prismatic glazing has been a very difficult task due to its versatile and complex geometrics. This article presents the development and validation of a simplified model to compute the optical characteristics and dominant directions of the transmitted and reflected beam rays of sawtooth-like prismatic glazing. The model was based on tracing the average ray and was extensively validated using third-party data derived from ray tracing computer simulations and measurement using integrating spheres and goniophotometers. The model's predictions for the transmittance and reflectance of single and double prismatic panes compared well overall within the accuracy of the third-party data over all incidence angles.

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 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.237 · 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