Detailed analysis of electricity, water, and gas consumption quantities and costs in Toronto’s public schools
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study analyzes the consumption quantities and costs of energy, water, and gas for a sample of 10 conventional and 20 energy-retrofitted public schools in Toronto over a 5 year study period to establish a benchmark for the consumption of energy in traditional versus more sustainable buildings. Through extensive statistical analysis of the data collected, the study demonstrates that electricity and gas consumption quantities and costs decrease more significantly in energy-retrofitted schools than in conventional schools. Whereas energy-retrofitted schools consume and spend on average as much money on energy as conventional schools, energy-retrofitted schools consume and spend more money on electricity and less money on gas than conventional schools. Energy-retrofitted schools also exhibit stronger and more significant positive relationships between the quantities of electricity, water, and gas consumed per user in those schools and the schools’ total number of users than conventional schools.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it