MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887709959 · doi:10.1177/1744259118786758

Buildings with environmental quality management, part 3: From log houses to environmental quality management zero-energy buildings

2018· article· en· W2887709959 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Building Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectural engineeringZero-energy buildingBuilding envelopeQuality (philosophy)Environmental qualityDurabilityBuilding scienceEfficient energy useBuilding designConstruction engineeringComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The discussion in this article starts in the 1920s, that is, at the time of the humble beginnings of building science and brings us to 2020s with the development of net-zero energy buildings. The knowledge accumulated by explaining observed failures in the practice of construction slowly formed a basis for moving toward a predictive capability and to an integration of modeling and testing. Furthermore, we have learned that interactions between energy efficiency, indoor environmental quality, and moisture management are so critical that the three issues must be considered simultaneously. Effectively, a change in the low energy is needed to ensure durability of materials and cost considerations for these buildings. At this stage, one could observe a clear change in the mind-set of the scientific community. Forty years after construction of the first 10 passive homes, we made a shocking observation—an adequate technology has been developed, but our lack of vision prevents effective use of this technology. Again, we need to modify our vision and change the design paradigm to balance comfort, building durability, and cost-effectiveness. If the quest for sustainable buildings is our ultimate objective, then we should learn more from the surrounding nature; termites appear to master the art of hygrothermal control better than humans because they can optimize transient conditions to maintain a stable interior comfort zone. Thus, in the article to follow a new compact building envelope design package is proposed, applicable to different climates with specific modifications of critical hygrothermal material properties. This approach is called the Environmental Quality Management. This will be the second step for a building science (physics) needed to become a leading force in the transition to sustainable built environments.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.247 · 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