An international regulatory perspective - for class 1 and 2 buildings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Condensation is a complex and inter-connected problem relating the complexities of themodern built fabric, changing legislative requirements, and increased consumerexpectations of thermal comfort within housing. Many factors within the design, constructionand building occupation compound and confound the problem. When this phenomenon isnot well understood, the law of unintended consequences becomes manifested. Since 2007,research by the School of Architecture and Design (Utas) has identified many assemblagesthat lack holistic vapour management consideration. For example, low-pitched roofs canaccumulate droplets under the sarking that drip onto ceilings, uninsulated recessed downlightsbecome a condensing thermal bridges and allow for vapour transport betweenconditioned and unconditioned zones. Top and bottom plates become thermal bridges forcondensation to form in ceiling cornices and wall skirtings, BAL rated roofs become sealedto exclude cinders but also obstruct ventilation and retain moisture.<p> </p>Over the past decade the research team has provided ongoing support and advice to designand construction professionals and regulators. More recently, in 2014 and 2016, theresearch has included an extensive literature review of experiences and built fabricregulation in other developed nations. This research has included significant collaborativerelationships with building material manufacturers, state and federal government agenciesand BRANZ. Most recently research has included a scoping study of the condensationproblem for the Australian Building Codes Board.<p> </p>This paper will discuss developments in built fabric regulation that have occurred in NewZealand, the United States, Canada, United Kingdom and the European Union. It will show asteady and significant increase in international regulatory requirements since 1995. Thepaper will also discuss the differences of approach to what is an acknowledged design andconstruction challenge for better thermally performing buildings in all climate types.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".