A Moisture Index to Characterize Climates for Building Envelope Design
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Premature failures of building envelopes in the 1990s, notably in coastal areas of North America, point to problems with Moisture management by Exterior Wall Systems (MEWS) 1 . The MEWS Consortium sought to combine field experience with lab testing and hygrothermal modeling to understand and deal with these problems. The method proposed in this paper was used in MEWS to (1) characterize climate with respect to the risk of related building envelope problems, (2) select locations of interest for a detailed hygrothermal parametric study, and (3) to select moisture reference years for the parametric study (not covered in this paper). This paper describes a method proposed for mapping North American climatic regions according to moisture loading on one hand, and the potential for drying on the other. The composite Moisture Index can be used either with hourly records or summary data and shows promise for application to specific problems, such as decay or corrosion, depending on the nature and mechanisms of the problem being investigated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it