Bibliographic record
Abstract
The frequency of power outages as a result of climate pressures are increasing and community centres are relied on as areas of refuge. Therefore, designing these buildings with passive survivability in mind is important, and challanging due to its high occupancy and fresh air requirements. This paper aims to evaluate the design measures of a community hub in the Canadian province of Ontario through the thermal resilience metric of passive survivability using building performance simulations. This study compares the performance of design strategies from building certification programs commonly followed to achieve high-performance envelope design. These include Passive House, Zero Carbon Building and Ontario Building Code (OBC) compliance criteria. The performance indicator is defined as the duration of time that the buildings remain habitable until the arrival of help or repair in the event of an extended power outage. Using whole-building energy modeling a power outage is simulated and the building is forced to rely on passive means of maintaining comfort, the PH and ZCB cases show far improved thermal autonomy (60% and 49% acceptable, respectively) when compared to the code baseline (18%). The high-performance envelopes of the PH and ZCB cases also result in greater passive survivability performance in both extreme summer and winter conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".