MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389584836 · doi:10.17118/11143/20909

Study of fire smoke movement from building integrated photovoltaic (BIPV)double skin façade (DSF) fires using helium gas

2023· article· en· W4389584836 on OpenAlexaff
Monireh Aram, Xin Zhang, Dahai Qi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire dynamics and safety research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuilding-integrated photovoltaicsPhotovoltaic systemHeliumSmokeNuclear engineeringHelium gasMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceAerospace engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringPhysicsElectrical engineeringWaste managementAtomic physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advanced building technologies such as building integrated photovoltaics (BIPVs) systems have been widely applied in new and existing constructions, in order to reduce energy consumption and electricity demand in buildings.Meanwhile they can cause a new critical challenge, i.e., fire safety issues.On the one hand, plume from the PV panel fires could spread into the buildings through the windows and ventilation openings.On the other hand, the risk of fire can be elevated by affecting the propagation of fire inside and outside the building.Furthermore, interfering with the smoke and venting system, firefighting operation, and electrical shock dangers.Most of the studies on the PV panels are to find the cause of failure, improving the cell efficiency, cost reduction and extracting maximum power, while there is the need to study the mechanism for smoke propagation as well.Applying BIPV on the building cause major changes in the traditional method of using structural components.These changes may include changes in the material, standard distances, gaps, and duties of elements, each of which can bring new fire safety issues.

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 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFire dynamics and safety researchFrench-language works237,207