MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977236289 · doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2011.05.027

Using Mud Bricks as a Temporary Solution for Gaza Reconstruction

2011· article· en· W1977236289 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Samar M. Sheweka

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Procedia · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrickRed mudEngineeringWaste managementChimney (locomotive)Civil engineeringArchaeologyGeographyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On Tuesday April 28, 2009 a report for BBC displayed an interview with a Palestinian citizen rebuilt his destroyed house with mud brick and mentioned that, it is a shame to live in a mud house at this age. The researcher was struck by this interview which led to work on this research. Due to the siege, the Palestinians lost the hope to reconstruct their destroyed homes, public buildings and infrastructure. Building with mud bricks as a thermal insulation and environmentally friendly method, works as a fire resistant, sound proof and can be entirely chemical free. It is cheaper; 80 m2 house made of cement would cost around 16,000 dollars at least, but a mud one with local materials cost just 3,000 dollars. Best of all, it can be made on site in any shape, color or size, made of a mixture of clay, mud, sand, and water mixed with a binding material such as rice husks or straw. Mud bricks fulfill the compressive strength and heat conductivity requirements. It also keeps indoor temperatures stationary during the summer and winter as a thermal insulation method. It is a traditional building material in much of the Middle East, India, North Africa and the majority of the Islamic cities buildings. Recently, there have been attempts to revive the use of mud brick through special projects such as those instigated by Hassan Fathy in Egypt, the beautiful Cob House on Mayne Island, Canada, etc. The mud bricks aim to save energy. The energy crisis experienced in the past have shifted the focus of the economical gain to energy saving. The research will display all the successful methods of building with mud bricks in order to extract different recommendations from it .this will be a guide for anyone who want to build his own house in a wonderful form, shape, style and colors. Besides different recommendations for the governmental institutions to encourage the citizens to reconstruct their homes by this method and construct models of mud houses to teach the citizens how to build their own homes? Finally, earthen structures are cheap, environmentally friendly and it is not a shame to live in a mud house but it is a global trend to preserve and to protect the environment.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.004

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.127 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations27
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy ProcediaSame topicArchaeology and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207