MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3007489981 · doi:10.1520/stp162120180139

Does the Underlayment Matter?

2020· book-chapter· en· W3007489981 on OpenAlexaff
David L. Roodvoets, Jonathan P. Spencer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHygrothermal properties of building materials
Canadian institutionsIntertek (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the roofing industry has undergone another major change with the introduction of underlayment products that have significant moisture retention and permeability differences from the traditional ASTM D226, Standard Specification for Asphalt-Saturated Organic Felt Used in Roofing and Waterproofing, Type I and Type II felts. It is expected that these differences will have an effect on the performance of some roof covers. The goal is to study the wetting and drying performance under natural conditions for a minimum of two years and to observe and photograph any changes in the wood. This study includes 11 different combinations of two types of underlayment and four continuous ventilation products under four variations of wood cedar shingles. Each of the 11 sets of shingles and underlayments installed on a 6/12 slope, south-facing roof over a traditional ventilated attic in Climate Zone 5 are instrumented with temperature and moisture probes on the tops and undersides of the shingles. This data as well as ambient weather data are captured and recorded by an onsite computer every 15 min, 24 h per day. The outdoor test facility roof is more than 25 ft long from eave to ridge and has the moisture and temperature probes at three locations on each of the 11 test sections. The goal is to study the wetting and drying performance under natural conditions for a minimum of two years and to observe and photograph any changes in the wood. The data show major differences in wetting and drying rates that are both product and underlayment dependent. The paper includes information on the data acquisition systems and their performance as well as test facility operating parameters and the moisture retention results. Cedar is a product that is moisture sensitive and therefore provides rapid acquisition of the moisture profiles as well as expanding data on ventilation benefits shown in Oak Ridge National Laboratory ventilation research.

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)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.003

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHygrothermal properties of building materialsFrench-language works237,207