MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reflexões Sobre Sustentabilidade na Composição de Painéis de Parede do Sistema Construtivo Wood Frame

2013· article· pt· W2318660705 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
L.R. Espíndola, A. Ino

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural and Food Sciences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflexMedicineAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among wood frame constructions, the platform system is extensively applied on North America and Canada, demonstrating its advantage and improving regularly the fulfillment of sustainability principles. In Brazil, based on the increasing of timber production from planted forests, this wood system is now much required by local builders. This fact denotes progress on Brazilians wood building techniques. However, in order to avoid the diminishment of the system advantages, it is necessary to evaluate the actual practice, even though here pointed with preliminary questions, in an effort to motivate the evolution and adjustment of its components applying sustainability principles on Brazil. With this scenario, this paper reasons about this theme with the purpose to contribute to future evaluations about sustainability on the wood frame wall panel composition and production. In order to achieve this objective, first this paper presents briefly an historical context focusing the introduction of wood frame on Brazil. Next, the authors detail the components remaining on the wall panel. Based on this information, the paper concludes about the wood frame wall panel composition on Brazil.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.214 · 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
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAgricultural and Food SciencesFrench-language works237,207