MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079232359 · doi:10.3130/aije.73.1435

CO2 EMISSIONS FROM THE CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF WELL-INSULATED AND AIRTIGHT HOUSES BASED ON MEASUREMENT SURVEY

2008· article· en· W2079232359 on OpenAlexaff
Hideki TAKAMURA, Yoshiharu ASANO

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering (Transactions of AIJ) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicEnergy, Environment, Agriculture Analysis
Canadian institutionsEmissions Reduction Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCeiling (cloud)ScheduleElectricityEnvironmental scienceEnergy consumptionConsumption (sociology)Waste managementPassive houseEnvironmental engineeringAgricultural economicsEngineeringArchitectural engineeringEfficient energy useComputer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CO2emissions from the construction and use of houses have been increasing. In order to promote the reduction of CO2 , it is necessary to know the exact amount of CO2 emissions from houses. First, the authors measured the exact weight of the construction materials and waste. Next, the authors researched the inhabitants' daily schedule and measured the energy consumption from using the house . The following results were obtained.1) The authors discovered the relationship between the energy consumption and the inhabitants' daily schedule.2) The amount of electricity consumed was 30.6GJ/year for the first year and 28.9GJ/year for the second year.3) The amount of CO2 emissions from both the construction and two years use of the house was 389.07kg-CO2/m2.4) The authors recalculated the amount of CO2 emissions into the amount of CO2 emissions per area of ceiling, floor and outer wall to discover the relationship between CO2 emissions from the construction and CO2emissions from use of the house.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Engineering (Transactions of AIJ)Same topicEnergy, Environment, Agriculture AnalysisFrench-language works237,207