MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905045334 · doi:10.2495/sdp180561

THE INTERSECTION OF BIOPHILIA AND ENGINEERING IN CREATING SUSTAINABLE, HEALTHY AND STRUCTURALLY SOUND BUILT ENVIRONMENTS

2018· article· en· W2905045334 on OpenAlexaff
Elaine Aye, Daniel Hackett, Chiara Pozzuoli

Bibliographic record

VenueWIT transactions on ecology and the environment · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsRowan Williams Davies & Irwin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntersection (aeronautics)Sound (geography)Computer scienceAcousticsArchitectural engineeringHuman–computer interactionEngineeringTransport engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As horizons in the urban world are increasingly diminished by the encroachment of skyscrapers and tall structures, humanity is lifting away from the natural environment. For generations, cities have been designed in ways that degrade the environment and alienate inhabitants from nature. With the densification of cities, building vertically is an obvious and sustainable choice -yet there are no trees, gardens or green spaces in the sky. A growing trend is for architects and engineers to create new ecosystems within urban high-rise environments, incorporating the concepts of biophilia -the inherent human instinct to connect to nature and the natural world. Biophilic design, by extension, weaves natural materials, natural light, vegetation, nature views and other experiences of the natural world into the built environment. This paper examines this overlooked aspect of our built environments, and the synergy between effective engineering and biophilic design. As engineers, we consult on the interactions of a building, its surrounding environment, and the human experience, taking a holistic approach while asking critical questions: Is it structurally safe? Is it sustainable? Does it contribute to occupant health and comfort at every level, while protecting those on the street below? We vet structural integrity and enhance occupant comfort as it relates to wind and thermal impact. For instance, if trees are added to 40-story-tall balconies, or an exterior green wall is integrated with cladding, it is vital to test wind loads to ensure stability and safety. While trees and greenery can reduce exposure to sun, block unwanted winds, and filter air, thereby increasing occupant well-being, they can also pose unique risks that may require creative engineering. The future of building is deepening in complexity, but with biophilic design and state-of-the-art engineering, we can create a utopian standard that binds modernization with the natural world.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.049
Scholarly communication0.0130.011
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWIT transactions on ecology and the environmentSame topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207