Principles for the Sustainable Design of Hospital Buildings
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Technological progress has had negative effects as well as positive effects if it affects the life industry and the entire ecosystem significantly through the great consumption of natural resources, and here the construction sector in general and the health sector, in particular, have a role in this. From the perspective of keeping pace with technological development, responding to environmental changes, and paying attention to hospital environments (especially since the emergence of modern epidemics), and because the construction sector is the largest consumer of energy in the world, which made international organizations move towards creating a sustainable environment in the construction of hospital buildings by reducing energy consumption. This research focused on studying the components and principles of sustainable design for hospital buildings and the environmental, economic, health, and social benefits of sustainable development in the healthcare industry. In addition to the research objective, which is to build a model as a guide to guide health care officials interested in applying sustainable design principles in hospital design, to achieve an ideal sustainable hospital environment. To achieve this goal, a comprehensive theoretical framework was built by adopting a descriptive and analytical approach and extracting the most important vocabulary and effective indicators for sustainable design in hospitals.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it