MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052874518 · doi:10.2495/sc080621

Green living envelopes for food and energy production in cities

2008· article· en· W2052874518 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Roehr, Jon Laurenz

Bibliographic record

VenueWIT transactions on ecology and the environment · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Heat Island Mitigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoltaic systemDowntownEnergy consumptionEnvironmental scienceProduction (economics)Energy conservationSolar energyArchitectural engineeringEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research explores the potential benefits derived from a proposed green intervention which combines living envelopes (green roofs and green façades) and green energy envelopes (photovoltaic and thermal panels), as a means of addressing the concept of carbon neutral cities.It proposes to take advantage of the environmental contributions that living envelopes provide, in terms of food production and the reduction of energy demand; as well as the energy produced through green energy envelopes such as photovoltaic and thermal panels.This green living envelopes intervention is applied to a specific site of downtown Vancouver, Canada.The research explores the contribution of such a green intervention.It analyses existing conditions of the site in terms of different building types and uses as well as their current energy consumption and CO 2 emissions.It then proposes to incorporate living envelopes such as green roofs and façades, as well as green energy envelopes by applying the proposed Vancouver Green Factor.Achieved findings from such a green intervention shows that the total energy consumed by buildings by the greening of roofs and façades would be reduced by 17%.In addition, energy produced through photovoltaic and thermal panels is enough to cover 16% of the energy demand.Moreover, by using green roofs as food producers, 54% of the vegetable demand of the people living in the selected site would be covered, further contributing to a reduction of 4% of the total food production.This translates into a reduction of 45% of CO 2 emissions produced by the selected site.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWIT transactions on ecology and the environmentSame topicUrban Heat Island MitigationFrench-language works237,207