MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244570636 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14649213

Impact of Toronto’s Avenues & Mid-rise Building Guidelines on Solar Energy Generation Potential

2021· preprint· en· W4244570636 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jelena Garic

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenewable energyFossil fuelPhotovoltaic systemSolar energyGreenhouse gasArchitectural engineeringEnvironmental scienceZero-energy buildingEfficient energy useEngineeringCivil engineeringWaste managementElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As cities grow, strategies for how and where to accommodate growth are increasingly important. Similarly, renewable energy is gaining importance as a means of reducing our dependency on fossil fuels and other non-renewables, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and pollution, and creating energy resiliency at a local level. The purpose of this Major Research Project is to determine the impact the Mid-Rise Building Performance Standards, from the City of Toronto’s 2010 Avenues and Mid-Rise Building Study, have on solar access and to quantify the potential of energy generation using solar photovoltaic systems along the Avenues in Toronto. What impact do the Performance Standards have on solar access to mid-rise buildings along the Avenues? The research concludes that low-podium built form provides the most benefit for the study area – Eglinton Avenue West, at Bathurst Street: the porous street-wall built-form, as outlined in the Mid-Rise Building Performance Standards, provides the highest solar energy generation and energy savings potential.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207