Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accredited Construction Details 71 'adoption' behaviours 38-40, 173 adoption risks 47, 106, 130-1, 134-5 aesthetic considerations 106, 190, 194-5 Affinity Sutton, FutureFit 131-9 affordable warmth 78 air movement 108 air permeability testing 149-50 air source heatpumps 219 airtightness 71, 108, 136 testing 149-50 Ameresco 161 Annual Energy Statement 145 apartments see flats; multifamily dwellings Approved Document L1B 68-9, 73 approved products 106 ApRemodel 48 architectural and historic interest 74-5, 190, 193-5 assessing properties for retrofit see selecting retrofit upgrades Atex standards 146 Austin, City of 60 Australia, energy performance rating 55 Barnsley biomass scheme 44 barriers to retrofit 171, 184-5, 187-97 contracting issues 192-3 cost 191-2 householder values and preferences 189-91 property features 193-5 time 193 behaviours 171-81 communication issues 173-4, 180 Index Building Regulations Denmark 87-8 UK, Part L1B 68-9, 70-7, 197 consequential improvements 75-6 future changes 76-7 building renovation see renovation work Building Research Establishment Domestic Energy Model (BREDEM) 22, 69, 102-3, 103 building size 58 building standards 55-6, 57, 58 building surveying approaches 46 CALEBRE Project 197 Cambridge Housing Model (CHM) 20-3, 22, 23 Canada, Toronto Community Housing (TCH) 157-8, 161-7 Carbon Co-operative, Urbed 45 carbon dioxide emissions see CO 2 emissions Carbon Emissions Reduction Target (CERT) 90-1, 170 Carbon Trust 149 cavity party walls, U-values 69-70, 70 cavity wall insulation 28, 77, 136 Cened + software 118 Centre for the Built Environment 151 CEPMC (Council of European Producers of Materials for Construction) 114 CERT (Carbon Emissions Reduction Target) 90-1, 170 CESP (Community Energy Saving Programme) 45, 78, 90, 170 change of use see material change of use Chartist House, EcoPod 44 city governance 12, 14, 17, 18 city-level strategy 7-8, 14-15 city-wide projects 12-13, 18 climate change targets Denmark 87 Germany 84 United Kingdom 90 CO 2 emission factors 69 CO 2 emissions reduction targets 84, 87, 90, 170 UK domestic trends 24-5 CO 2 equivalent 119 code of conduct for contractors 163
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.671 | 0.212 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".