MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381162372 · doi:10.3130/aijt.29.870

LITERATURE SURVEY ON THE HISTORY OF ATTIC VENTILATION REGULATIONS IN BUILDING CODES OF THE USA AND CANADA(PART 1): EARLY HISTORY OF RESEARCH AND REGULATIONS ON ATTIC VENTILATION IN THE USA

2023· article· en· W4381162372 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAIJ Journal of Technology and Design · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban and spatial planning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtticVentilation (architecture)EngineeringArchitectural engineeringCode (set theory)Building codeCivil engineeringForensic engineeringComputer scienceMechanical engineeringRoof

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The origin and changes of attic ventilation regulations in three model building codes and a dwelling code used in the United States prior to the publication of International Residential Code in 2000 were thoroughly investigated. Also, the early research works and official recommendations on house attic ventilation that formed the basis of these regulations were reviewed. Detail of regulations including vent area ratio and the usage of vapor barrier differed from code to code in early stage, but became almost the same after 1990. The present attic ventilation regulation for dwellings in Japan apparently has its ground in FPL/HHFA recommendation in 1950’s.

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 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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.189 · 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