MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2292089485

에너지빈곤층의 주거형태 및 에너지 소비형태 분석

2015· article· ko· W2292089485 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venue추계학술발표대회 · 2015
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnergy and Environmental Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy povertySingle familyRoofConsumption (sociology)Energy consumptionLow incomePovertyQuarter (Canadian coin)Agricultural economicsEconomicsGeographySocioeconomicsEngineeringEconomic growthCivil engineeringSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to present a typical energy poverty households through envelope type of energy poverty households and energy consumption type. Detached house was most have block structure, wood frame-single window, slate roof type. Multi-Family houses concrete structure, Wood frame-single window, concrete roof is the most common. Analysis results of energy consumption showed less than 1 million won income of low-income households that were using the year 8529 thousand Kcal. Low-income household income is a small compared to the general households. However, bad thermal insulation performance of the housing, energy consumtion is similar to the general households.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.516
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.007

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.231 · 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