Evaluation of Moisture Performance of Tall Wood Building Envelope under Climate Change in Different Canadian Climatic Regions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study was realized to assess the effects of historical and projected future climates on the hygrothermal performance of cross-laminated timber wall assemblies in 12 Canadian cities belonging to several climate regions and zones and for two cladding and ventilation types. Water ingress in the wall assembly was supposed to be 1% wind-driven rain (WDR), and the airflow rate in the drainage cavity was calculated using local climate data. The hygrothermal simulation results showed that under the assumption of no deficiencies allowing wind-driven rain to enter into the wall (perfect wall), there is no risk of mold growth in the future for both claddings, either vented or ventilated. Under the assumption of high moisture loads (1% WDR), the mold growth risk could increase significantly in all climate regions and cities considered. However, in those cities located in the Cordillera and Prairie regions, the increase was not found to be problematic as the maximum mold growth remained under the acceptable level, whereas for cities located in coastal and southeastern regions, the increase in mold growth risk could be considerable. The impacts of cladding and ventilation types on the relative performance of the walls varied with city location.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".