Towards codification of thermal resilience upgrades in midrise residential buildings: a Canadian archetype energy model approach
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extreme weather events are predicted to continue increasing in intensity and frequency, raising a serious concern about the thermal resilience and adaption of buildings to these events. A single residential archetype building will be chosen as the case study and evaluated in three locations across Canada (Vancouver, Ottawa, Charlottetown) using three historical extreme weather events. Two upgrade scenarios will be considered, a code-compliant (NECB 2020) and a high-performance building option, to compare thermal performance through hot/cold weather outages. By using a variety of outage events in cold-climate zones for an archetype building, this paper’s methodology offers a useful framework for building practitioners to assess the effects of building upgrades on performance metrics and improve building resilience. This research could eventually contribute to the development of codes by providing upgrade packages to create infrastructure that both mitigates and adapts to future climate change extreme weather.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it