Assessing the Moisture Resilience of Wood Frame Wall Assemblies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resilience has been used as a building performance metric that measures the building’s capability of absorption, response, and recovery from one or a series of disruptive events, e.g., extreme weather events or power outage events. With respect to resilience, in relation to the moisture performance of the building envelope (moisture resilience), this aspect has not yet been thoroughly explored nor defined. Given the expected increase in annual precipitation in certain regions of Canada as induced by climate change effects occurring both currently and in the future, the moisture resilience of building envelops will require immediate attention given that wall assemblies of buildings are predicted to be subjected to excessive moisture loads in the coming years. In this study, the moisture resilience of wood frame wall assemblies to mould growth was described from three aspects: (i) absorption—the ability of the wall to maintain a low level of relative humidity on the OSB; (ii) response—the fluctuation of the relative humidity on the OSB; and (iii) recovery—the rate at which the relative humidity recovers to an acceptable level. The metrics used to demonstrate the relative impact of these factors on moisture performance were also developed. The results have revealed a robust correlation between moisture performance and the relative influence of various newly defined aspects of moisture resilience.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".