MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280518125 · doi:10.3390/buildings12050648

Experimental Characterization of Raw Earth Properties for Modeling Their Hygrothermal Behavior

2022· article· en· W4280518125 on OpenAlexaff
Yassine Elias Belarbi, M Sawadogo, Philippe Poullain, Nabil Issaadi, Ameur El Amine Hamami, Stéphanie Bonnet, Rafik Belarbi

Bibliographic record

VenueBuildings · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHygrothermal properties of building materials
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Materials scienceMoistureCharacterization (materials science)Raw materialThermal conductivityEnvironmental scienceWork (physics)StrawSorptionThermalMaterial propertiesComposite materialEngineeringMechanical engineeringMeteorologyGeologyNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Raw earth is one of the oldest building materials of mankind. Almost a third of the world’s population is living in an earth-based house. However, their use remains low compared to conventional materials such as concrete, steel, and wood. Although these geosourced materials are abundant, recyclable, and have a low environmental footprint, their use is very limited in the construction sector. This can be explained by the lack of data regarding their hygrothermal behavior. In this context, the present work aims to highlight the properties of cob construction material with straw addition. An experimental characterization of hygrothermal and microstructural properties has been carried out. Thermal conductivity, specific heat, sorption isotherms, moisture storage capacity, moisture buffer value (MBV), and water vapor permeability are obtained experimentally. Then, the collected data are used as input parameters of a numerical prediction model to numerically assess the thermal and hygric behavior. Cob is then compared to other more commonly used materials to highlight the benefits of its use within the context of the energetic and environmental transition. Our results will allow better understanding of the behavior of the new geosourced material thanks to experimental and numerical investigation.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations25
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuildingsSame topicHygrothermal properties of building materialsFrench-language works237,207