A pathway to rooftops: a feasibility study of green roof typologies at 105 Bond Street
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the feasibility of a green roof at the School of Urban and Regional Planning (SURP), located at 105 Bond Street, Toronto. Green roofs have proven benefits within the energy-air-stormwater nexus that often translate in direct operating cost savings. With a history of prior proposals, SURP is well positioned both ideologically and practically for the implementation of a green roof. Ryerson University is also undergoing a period of vertical growth which will dramatically increase visibility on existing heritage structures like 105 Bond. Ultimately, this paper proposes a semi-intensive green roof split across the building’s upper and lower tiers. Over time the School of Urban and Regional Planning will continue to develop its robust culture of custodianship among faculty, students, and alumni to allow for the long-term health of the green roof and reduced on-going maintenance load. The addition of dedicated research beds included on the upper tier of the proposed green roof are another key long-term benefit that will produce year-to-year project outcomes. Key words: Green roof, resiliency, Canada, planning, vegetation
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".