MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237301113 · doi:10.4324/9781315763279-12

DYNAMIC, ADAPTIVE BUILDING ENVELOPES (Hathaway)

2015· book-chapter· en· W4237301113 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicArchitecture, Modernity, and Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Buildings currently account for 75% of the carbon emissions on the planet, so if we are serious about reducing greenhouse-effects we need to explore better ways to design and construct buildings to achieve improved energy performance. With buildings consuming circa 50% of the United States’ total energy, we should re-examine past practice; building envelopes can no longer be passive, they must become dynamic and adaptive. The development of adaptive buildings requires early design collaboration to examine trade-offs versus energy costs for heating and cooling. Achieving optimized building envelopes requires design to be integrated across disciplines. Selection of curtain wall, glass substrates, solar shading devices, fixed/operable windows, and window sizes requires critical analysis relative to the building’s global site positioning and solar orientation, as well as weather, wind, and context within its built environment. We can develop building envelopes designed to accept or reject free energy from the external ecosystem, and as a result, reduce the cost of power required to achieve a comfortable, internal environment. Case studies such as “The Bow”, Encana’s headquarters in Calgary; Aura, Toronto’s tallest 78-story condo tower, now under construction; and DFR 57, a residential rental project in New York City, will be featured to demonstrate how with collaboration and technology, the AEC industry can bring intelligence to performance-based design and achieve more energy efficient buildings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0470.018

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 head0.230
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArchitecture, Modernity, and DesignFrench-language works237,207