MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246467828 · doi:10.1520/stp45402s

Water Vapor Transmission Measurement and Significance of Corrections

2007· book-chapter· en· W4246467828 on OpenAlexaff
Phalguni Mukhopadhyaya, Kumar Kumaran, John Lackey, David van Reenen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater vaporEnvironmental scienceTransmission (telecommunications)PhysicsMeteorologyComputer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water vapor transmission properties of building materials play an important role in the overall moisture management and durability of the exterior building envelopes. The cup method, as described in the ASTM Standard Test Methods for Water Vapor Transmission of Materials (E 96), is widely used in North America and other parts of the world for this purpose. Recently the latest ASTM standard (E 96/E 96M-05) has started taking into account various corrections (e.g., buoyancy correction, correction for resistance due to still air and specimen surface, edge mask correction, etc.) while analyzing the results obtained from the cup methods. This paper presents the results obtained from the laboratory tests carried out on more than 50 building materials. These results have been used to demonstrate the significance of various corrections on the measured water vapor permeability or permeance of various commonly used building materials or components. The results presented in this paper were discussed in the ASTM technical task group to underline the importance of various corrections for the calculation of water vapor transmission properties of various building materials.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.161 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207