MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001928361 · doi:10.3992/jgb.7.3.49

EXPLORING THE DIVERSITY OF GREEN BUILDINGS

2012· article· en· W2001928361 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Green Building · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreen buildingArchitectural engineeringDiversity (politics)SustainabilityMultitudeArchitectureCertificationEngineeringSustainable designProcess (computing)Order (exchange)BusinessGeographyComputer scienceManagementEcologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION 25 years of experience in sustainable architecture and 10 years of experience in designing LEED-certified buildings and providing LEED consulting to projects has allowed our firm, Prairie Architects Inc., to collect a great deal of experience on green buildings. Through the years, we have come to realize the great diversity of what it means to be a green building and the multitude of avenues that can be followed in order to pursue that end goal. Factors such as building type, location, and owner representation can have a dramatic impact on what sustainability opportunities are available to a project. This article examines the process of determining the path to a green building through three case studies of recently constructed projects in Manitoba, Canada. Through each case study we will reflect on the challenges encountered as well as highlight the successes and opportunities that were found.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.190 · 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