MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2518752583 · doi:10.1108/wjstsd-01-2016-0008

A benchmarking approach to the progress of green materials and systems’ use in the UAE construction industry

2016· article· en· W2518752583 on OpenAlexaff
Aly Elgayar, Salwa Beheiry, Alaa Jabbar, Hamad Al Ansari

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Science Technology and Sustainable Development · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmarkingRanking (information retrieval)OriginalityWork (physics)EngineeringBusinessBaseline (sea)Construction industryArchitectural engineeringEngineering managementConstruction engineeringMarketingComputer sciencePolitical scienceMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Over the past decade, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) introduced several green regulatory guidelines, federal decrees, and a considerable number of environmentally friendly initiatives. Hence, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the top green materials and systems used currently in the UAE construction industry as per the new laws dictate as well as see if professionals are switching over to incorporate more green materials, systems, and/or designs. Design/methodology/approach The work involved reviewing internationally popular green materials and systems for construction, developing a questionnaire based on the literature review, surveying professionals in the seven UAE emirates, and ranking the findings based on the relative importance index. Findings Findings found the top used green materials and system in the UAE’s construction industry. As well as identified that there is a communication gap between the design and implementation phases that is possibly hindering the use of more green materials and systems. Originality/value This study sets a baseline to measure the UAE’s progress over the coming years in terms of integrating more green construction materials, systems, methodologies, and trends.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.518
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Science Technology and Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207