Thermal Design Considerations for Raised Structures on Permafrost
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With advances in the ability to model complex geothermal conditions, the aspect of soil structure interaction as it relates to long-term changes in the geothermal regime can be considered. Traditional geothermal modeling relied on the so-called n-factor approach where the ground surface temperature was represented as the air temperature multiplied by some factor to account for ground surface effects. The application of surface energy balance formulations where the effects of the building including long wave radiation can be incorporated, allows for a more accurate representation of the geothermal regime under the structure. In considering the impact of climate warming on the performance of raised buildings in permafrost terrain, the use of a surface energy balance in the geothermal model is considered to be a more rigorous and technically preferable approach to addressing this problem. This paper addresses the use of a surface energy balance formulation in the geothermal analysis of raised buildings construction in permafrost terrain and its impact on the long-term geothermal regime. Specifically, the impact of building construction on the underlying geothermal regime have direct implication to the ongoing discussion regarding the need for climate change adaptation to address potential foundation capacity degradation in light of climate warming. Both existing field data and geothermal modeling results presented in this paper demonstrate that ground temperatures under a raised building cool over time and become colder than the ground remote from the building. When long-term climate warming is considered, the ground temperatures at depth do warm, but after 20 years of climate warming the ground temperatures under the building are still not warmer than the initial ground temperatures remote from the building.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".