MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135802878 · doi:10.1061/9780784413609.012

Service Life Safety and Reliability of Building Facades

2014· article· en· W2135802878 on OpenAlexaff
Saviz Moghtadernejad, Saeed Mirza

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFacilities and Workplace Management
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMAB-Mackay Rehabilitation Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectural engineeringReliability (semiconductor)Service (business)Service lifeEngineeringReliability engineeringStructural failureConstruction engineeringComputer scienceBuilding designForensic engineeringStructural engineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Facades, mounted as non-structural elements on the exterior of buildings, contribute to their aesthetics and technical performance, including protection of the building interior from any exterior aggressive environment. Unfortunately, design and detailing of facades have received much less attention than the building structure itself. Serious incidents of façade failures, including several fatal ones, have occurred all over the world. This paper reports the results of a research program aimed at: (1) examining the performance and reliability of building facades; (2) considering the various safety-related issues associated with risks involved in design, construction, maintenance, repair; and (3) overall performance of these facades over their entire service life, along with the various failure modes. Appropriate strategies are recommended to minimize these risks through improved life-cycle design and construction, and regular inspection and maintenance programs.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.269
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFacilities and Workplace ManagementFrench-language works237,207