Роль СМИ в формировании в российском обществе атмосферы толерантности
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Campus master plans are released every few years for developing and implementing its physical infrastructure. Open spaces, compactness, connectivity, greenness, and environmental impact have often been the focus on its framework. In particular, the effect of new building development on existing buildings' occupant comfort and design intent is mostly ignored. Providing guidelines to retain existing users' comfort for stakeholders involved in design decision making will result in improved design decisions. Hence, this research aims to provide a work methodology to mitigate the adverse effects of new buildings on existing buildings' user comfort through a case study at Carleton University. The case study shows a methodology to retain the existing users' comfort by analyzing Carleton University's master plan on massing studies, occupant survey to understand their comfort needs, performance analysis of the impact of the new building on the existing building user comfort. The analysis reveals the key parameters to consider in design for occupants' comfort. Finally, the research reinforces the generative design and the need for dynamic modeling in campus master plans to mitigate the negative implications of new development on occupants' comfort.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.009 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it