MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2596361897 · doi:10.3992/1552-6100.12.1.123

AN EVALUATION OF INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND OCCUPANT WELL-BEING IN MANITOBA SCHOOL BUILDINGS

2017· article· en· W2596361897 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ahmed Radwan, Mohamed Issa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Green Building · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndoor air qualityThermal comfortEnvironmental qualityAir quality indexArchitectural engineeringEnvironmental sciencePost-occupancy evaluationPsychologyEngineeringGeographyEnvironmental engineeringMeteorologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This exploratory research aims to evaluate indoor environmental quality in the classrooms of three school buildings in Southern Manitoba, Canada, and to evaluate the well-being of these schools' teachers as it pertains to their perception of their classrooms' indoor environment. The schools include a middle-aged, conventional school; a new, non-green school; and a new, green school certified using the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design rating system. The methodology involved using a mobile instrument cart to conduct snapshot measurements of thermal comfort, indoor air quality, lighting and acoustics in classrooms and an occupant survey to evaluate teachers' long-term satisfaction with their classrooms' indoor environmental quality. The results showed that the new, green and new, non-green schools' classrooms performed better than the conventional, middle-aged school's classrooms with respect to some aspects of thermal comfort and indoor air quality only. Teachers in the new, green school and in the new, non-green school were more satisfied than teachers in the conventional, middle-aged school with their classrooms' overall indoor environmental quality, lighting quality and indoor air quality. Surprisingly, the new, green and new-non green school classrooms' performance were very comparable with the new, green school's classrooms performing statistically significantly better with respect to relative humidity. Similarly, none of the differences in teachers' satisfaction ratings between the new, green and new, non-green school were statistically significant.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Green BuildingSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207