MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392628970 · doi:10.26868/25222708.2023.1414

Human-centric lighting assessment of balcony design

2023· article· en· W4392628970 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

VenueBuilding Simulation Conference proceedings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicImpact of Light on Environment and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArchitectural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We curate four human-centric lighting metrics for the design of homes with balconies: residential daylight (RDA, DLA), view quality, balcony gardening potential, and circadian health potential. Balcony gardening potential is a novel metric based on the fraction of global horizontal irradiance received at the balcony. We prepare a parametric simulation space of 31,034 simulations of apartments with balconies in Vancouver and develop a standard method of displaying their results for use in design analysis. Based on an analysis of the results, we propose standard design criteria for typical minimum performance recommendations and a high-quality of daylight design based on the median and third quartile of our results. Correlations between twelve design parameters and our metric outcomes are communicated in order to support intuitive design decisions when simulations are not possible.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.287 · 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