MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Circular Retrofit Lab: a multi-disciplinary development of a building envelope according to circular design qualities

2021· article· en· W4200597593 on OpenAlexaff
Charlotte Cambier, Jeroen Poppe, Waldo Galle, Stijn Elsen, Niels De Temmerman

Bibliographic record

VenueIOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSustainable Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekEuropean Commission
KeywordsBuilding envelopeArchitectural engineeringRetrofittingModular designEngineeringEnvelope (radar)Process (computing)DisciplineEngineering design processConstruction engineeringBuilding designCivil engineeringSystems engineeringComputer scienceMechanical engineeringStructural engineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract From 2016 until 2019, the Circular Retrofit Lab (CRL) was realised within the H2020-funded project Building As Material Banks (BAMB). The CRL was an experimental pilot project concerning the refurbishment of eight student housing modules in Brussels, Belgium. The lab aims to demonstrate how to implement circular building design in a retrofitting project. This paper discusses the design choices and the outcome of the CRL’s building envelope. That envelope consists of a modular façade system of prefabricated panels. The innovative, adaptable and reusable building solutions applied in the CRL have been developed in collaboration with various construction stakeholders and included, exceptionally in the design and construction process, also industrial partners. In this study, we go deeper into the impact of the multi-disciplinary approach on the resulting implementation of a circular building envelope. Through a reflexive learning-history workshop, we can show how the involvement of various actors and unconventional circularity requirements increase the complexity of the project, but also how they positively impact the reactivation of existing buildings and proved to be a lasting learning opportunity to all partners involved.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.202 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental ScienceSame topicSustainable Supply Chain ManagementFrench-language works237,207