MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sustainability Assessments of Buildings

2017· book· en· W4211245183 on OpenAlexafffund
Umberto Berardi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersPriority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education InstitutionsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaEuropean CommissionNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSustainabilityArchitectural engineeringEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental planningBusinessEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

His main research interests and contributions are related to the study of building systems that incorporate new materials.In the first years of his career, Dr. Berardi often worked on natural materials for acoustic applications and on sustainable design through natural materials.Recently, he has been focusing on integrating innovative materials such as nanotechnologies into building systems.He has mainly focused on organic PCMs and on granular and monolithic aerogel.Dr. Berardi has an extensive publication record with over 80 peer-reviewed journals, most of which in top journals.Many of his papers have received high appreciation and have been awarded among the most read and most cited papers of the journals in which they appeared.Dr. Berardi was awarded the ISSNAF award in Washington DC, as the most brilliant Italian Engineer under 40 in North America and the Applied Energy award as the author of one of the most cited papers in Applied Energy in 2016.Dr.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.004

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207