MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2985845493

Adopting the Principles of Building Physics, Smart Materials and New Technologies in the Design of Energy Efficient Buildings

2017· article· en· W2985845493 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ogwu Ikechukwu, Nnamaka U Nzewi

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityEfficient energy useArchitectural engineeringEnvironmentally friendlyBuilding automationClimate changeEmbodied energyGlobal warmingQuality (philosophy)Environmental economicsEmerging technologiesEnvironmental qualityBuilding designEnvironmental resource managementEngineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceBusinessEnvironmental scienceEcologyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Buildings account for 30 to 40% of energy use globally, with a supplement of 5 to 10% being used in processing and transportation of construction products and components. Over the past few decades, the construction sector has been under increasing pressure to improve its cost efficiency, sustainability, and capacity, pushed by the endeavour and need to face consequences of global warming and climate change. Indeed, the increased awareness of climate change and other environmental concerns are empowering innovative solutions that seek to improve the quality of life while being environmentally-friendly. It is possible to satisfy and eventually reduce the energy demands of buildings, with less-carbon intensive approaches, through advancements in the realm of building physics, smart materials and new technologies; this paper attempts to introduce the concept of smart materials and new technology and show how they are being used to achieve energy efficiency in several projects.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207