MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Method for Conceptual Design Applied to Office Buildings

2002· article· en· W2110418442 on OpenAlexafffund
D. E. Grierson, S. Khajehpour

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computing in Civil Engineering · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConceptual designPareto principleMulti-objective optimizationSet (abstract data type)Rank (graph theory)GraphicsGenetic algorithmMathematical optimizationComputer scienceComputer graphicsIndustrial engineeringOperations researchEngineeringData miningMachine learningMathematicsHuman–computer interactionComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper presents a computer-based method for the multicriteria conceptual design of engineered artifacts. The proposed method involves genetic-based stochastic search, Pareto optimization, and color-filtered graphics. A multicriteria genetic algorithm broadly searches the governing body of design knowledge and identifies Pareto designs that are equal-rank optimal in the sense that each is not simultaneously dominated for all objective criteria by any other feasible design. Computer color filtering of the Pareto-optimal design set creates informative graphics that identify trade-off relationships between competing objective criteria, as well as design subsets having particular designer-specified attributes. Much of the paper is devoted to presenting a detailed illustration of the method for the cost-revenue conceptual design of high-rise office buildings, including several examples.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.008

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.205 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations84
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computing in Civil EngineeringSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207