MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315146903 · doi:10.13083/reveng.v19i5.193

NOTA TÉCNICA: DESENVOLVIMENTO E AVALIAÇÃO DE PLACAS PRÉ-MOLDADAS DE ARGAMASSA ARMADA PARA CIRCULAÇÃO DE ÁGUA, VISANDO À UTILIZAÇÃO EM MATERNIDADES DE SUÍNOS

2011· article· pt· W2315146903 on OpenAlexaff
Haroldo Carlos Fernándes, Ricardo Fontes Moreira, Paula Cristina Natalino Rinaldi, Amanda Bernardes

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Engenharia na Agricultura - REVENG · 2011
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este trabalho foi realizado com o objetivo de definir parâmetros térmicos adequados para o projeto de sistemas de resfriamento e aquecimento de pisos, visando ao conforto térmico das matrizes e leitões nas maternidades. Inicialmente, três placas pré-moldadas de argamassa armada foram construídas, utilizando-se métodos distintos, visando à circulação de água resfriada para as matrizes e água aquecida para os leitões. A placa designada P1 foi construída com vazios no formato de serpentinas, em seu interior sem a presença de tubos. Na placa P2, utilizou-se tubo corrugado de polietileno, em forma de serpentinas, embutido na argamassa armada. Na placa P3, adotou-se o mesmo método de construção da placa P1, variando-se apenas a área de circulação de água. Na placa P1 atingiu-se uma temperatura superficial de aproximadamente 1 oC superior à P2 para uma mesma temperatura da água de entrada nas placas. No entanto, optou-se pela utilização da placa P2 , em razão da maior facilidade de construção e maior inércia térmica.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Engenharia na Agricultura - REVENGSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207