MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Air-Permeability Factor for Wind Loads on Loose-Laid Pavers on Flat Roofs

2020· article· en· W3026258083 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRoofFlat roofGeotechnical engineeringAerodynamicsEngineeringGeologyStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Installation of open-joint roof paver systems with pedestals on flat roofs leaves a cavity between pavers and roof deck, allowing the development of cavity pressure. The cavity suction on roof pavers reduces the net wind uplift and overturning. This study conducted pressure measurements of the paved roof of a large-scale building model using the University of Western Ontario’s WindEEE Dome. The air-permeability factor was evaluated as a ratio of directional envelopes of peak net-pressure coefficients of the paved roof to peak external pressure coefficients of the bare roof. The air-permeability factors varied with pavers’ location across the roof, and wind uplift load decreased 40% for pavers in the corner and edge roof zones. Moreover, pressure tests conducted on roofs with high perimeter parapets showed that air-permeability effects of pavers and shielding effects of perimeter parapets can be treated as independent aerodynamic factors for evaluating the net uplift wind loads on rooftop pavers. Therefore the overall effect can be obtained simply by multiplying the roof pressure on bare flat roofs by air-permeability and parapet factors.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.197 · 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