MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984609044 · doi:10.3992/jgb.6.1.14

Okanagan College Centre of Excellence in Sustainable Building Technologies and Renewable Energy Conservation

2011· article· en· W1984609044 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Hay, Robert Parlane

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Green Building · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsInterior HealthOkanagan College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcellenceMandateEngineeringSyllabusRenewable energyArchitectural engineeringEngineering managementSustainabilitySustainable designSustainable developmentScheduleCivil engineeringBusinessEnvironmental planningPolitical scienceManagementGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Centre of Excellence at Okanagan College in Penticton, British Columbia is being designed as one of the most innovative and sustainable post-secondary facilities in the world. On schedule for design and construction to be complete by April 2011, the two-storey multi-purpose facility has a mandate to provide trades and technology training and professional development to students from the province of British Columbia and beyond. It is aimed at attaining the highest standard of sustainable building design, the Living Building Challenge. The building will support a syllabus with a focus on the design, installation, and support of sustainable building technologies and processes, and the development and application of alternative and renewable energy. The building itself will become an essential element of the educational programs that will reside there, a teaching tool for education on building trades and engineering technologies. In addition, the Okanagan Research Innovation Centre will be incorporated into the building, providing opportunities for start-up companies to develop and prototype new green technologies in a supportive and synergistic environment. This article will demonstrate that a project with this level of sustainable objectives is achievable at a cost comparable to conventional building design. It will address how this can be attained through an integrated design process, along with the numerous innovative features that have been incorporated into the building design to help it function with a small environmental impact, and a large educational one.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0740.012

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Green BuildingSame topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207