Bibliographic record
Abstract
As building codes continue to introduce more stringent performance requirements, the placement of insulation in the building enclosure has been shifted to the exterior to provide a continuous insulation layer and reduce thermal bridging. However, modern construction practices for foundation walls typically leave the below-grade insulation exposed to the exterior environment, resulting in the insulation layer absorbing moisture from the soil. This moisture absorption will decrease the long-term performance of insulation and is typically not accounted for in the design, resulting in buildings performing below the expected level. The magnitude of this reduction will vary depending on the type of insulation used. This study utilized hygrothermal modelling and laboratory testing to determine how significant this reduction in performance will be for various types of insulation typically used below-grade. The insulation types investigated in this study include EPS, graphite embedded EPS (GPS), XPS, mineral wool, and closed-cell spray foam. The results showed a minimal increase in thermal conductivity amongst the rigid polystyrene insulation products, while the thermal conductivities of the spray foam and mineral wool insulations increased by approximately 10% and 20% respectively. The minimal effect on the polystyrene insulation products is likely a consequence of the lower permeabilities of these products. Additional research should be conducted over a longer wetting period. In cold climates, the effect of freeze-thaw cycling on these insulations should also be studied.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".