Achieving the acoustical credit within the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) for healthcare green building rating system and changes within the forthcoming 2014 Guidelines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2009 LEED® for Healthcare green building rating system includes a total of two possible points to be earned by satisfying the requirements of the Indoor Environmental Quality Credit 2 (IEQ Credit 2: Acoustic Environment). This credit references criteria that are defined by the Facility Guidelines Institute's 2010 Guidelines for Design and Construction of Health Care Facilities (2010 FGI Guidelines). The acoustical design requirements of the 2010 FGI Guidelines will be summarized, as well as a brief history of the FGI document itself. The FGI Guidelines document is currently being revised for the 2014 edition. Proposed changes in the 2014 edition will also be briefly discussed, as we anticipate that future versions of the LEED® rating system will reference the 2014 FGI Guidelines. The presentation will be made in English by Mr. Horan, secretary of the FGI's Acoustical Working Group (AWG). Mr. Latour, a French-Canadian member of the AWG, will be available to help respond to any French-speaking audience members during Q&A.
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 | 0.014 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.164 | 0.118 |
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".